Farming/language dispersal hypothesis
{{Short description|Hypothesis about the spread of language families}}
The farming/language dispersal hypothesisHigham, C. Chapter 18 Languages and Farming Dispersals: Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation (2003). proposes that many of the largest language families in the world dispersed along with the expansion of agriculture. This hypothesis was proposed by archaeologists Peter Bellwood and Colin Renfrew. It has been widely debated and archaeologists, linguists, and geneticists often disagree with all or only parts of the hypothesis.
The hypothesis
File:Language families of the Old World and their suggested expansions.jpg
The farming/language dispersal hypothesis links the spread of farming in pre-historic times with the spread of languages and language families. The hypothesis is that a language family begins when a society with its own language adopts farming as a primary means of subsistence while its neighbors are hunter-gatherers who speak unrelated languages. A sedentary farming society supports a much greater density of population than its neighboring nomadic or semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers. The language of the farming society displaces that of the hunter-gatherer society which may also become agricultural. Farming and the language of the original farmers spread to more and more societies. In some cases the original language, which evolves over time into many different but related languages, has attained world-wide dispersion.{{cite journal |last1=Renfrew |first1=Colin |title=World Linguistic Diversity |journal=Scientific American |date=January 1994 |volume=270 |issue=1 |pages=116–123 |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0194-116 |pmid=8284657 |bibcode=1994SciAm.270a.116R |url=https://www.academia.edu/31722548 |access-date=6 January 2022}}{{cite book |last1=Robeets |first1=Martine |title=Chapter 1, Farming/Language Dispersal |date=2017 |publisher=John Benjamins Publishing Company |location=Jena |isbn=9789027264640 |pages=1–2 |hdl=20.500.12657/29648 |url=https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/29648}}
In sum, "the farming/language dispersal hypothesis makes the radical and controversial proposal that the present-day distributions of many of the world's languages and language families can be traced back to the early developments and dispersals of farming..."{{cite web |title=Examining the Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis |url=https://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/examining-the-farming-language-dispersal-hypothesis.html |website=Ox Bow Books |access-date=10 January 2022 |archive-date=18 June 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210618150244/https://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/examining-the-farming-language-dispersal-hypothesis.html |url-status=dead }}
Examples
=Indo-European=
The Anatolian hypothesis states that Proto-Indo-Europeans lived in Anatolia throughout the Neolithic period, and that the spread of the Indo-European language was associated with the Neolithic Revolution of the 7th-6th millennium BC. It claims that the Proto-Indo-European language spread from Asia Minor to Europe around 7000 BC with the Neolithic Revolution and peacefully mixed with indigenous peoples.Renfrew, Colin (1990) [1987]. Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-52-138675-3. Therefore, most Neolithic Europeans spoke an Indo-European language, and later migrations replaced it with another Indo-European language. However, there is currently more evidence that supports the Kurgan hypothesis, which is another explanation for the origin and dispersal of the Indo-European languages.{{cite journal|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/576998/summary|author=Will Chang, Chundra Cathcart, David Hall, Andrew Garrett |title=Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis | journal=Language|publisher=Linguistic Society of America|date=2015|volume=91|number=1|pages=193–244|doi=10.1353/lan.2015.0005 |s2cid=143978664 }}Science News. 2015. “Genetic Study Revives Debate on Origin and Expansion of Indo-European Languages in Europe.” March 4, 2015. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150304075334.htm
=Bantu=
The Bantu languages descend from a common Proto-Bantu language, which is believed to have been spoken in what is now Cameroon in Central Africa.Philip J. Adler, Randall L. Pouwels, World Civilizations: To 1700 Volume 1 of World Civilizations, (Cengage Learning: 2007), p.169. An estimated 2,500–3,000 years ago (1000 BC to 500 BC), speakers of the Proto-Bantu language began a series of migrations eastward and southward, carrying agriculture with them. This Bantu expansion came to dominate Sub-Saharan Africa east of Cameroon, an area where Bantu peoples now constitute nearly the entire population.Toyin Falola, Aribidesi Adisa Usman, Movements, borders, and identities in Africa, (University Rochester Press: 2009), p.4. Some other sources estimate the Bantu Expansion started closer to ~5,000 years ago.Gemma Berniell-Lee et al, [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/7/1581.abstract "Genetic and Demographic Implications of the Bantu Expansion: Insights from Human Paternal Lineages"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110416143255/http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/7/1581.abstract |date=2011-04-16 }}, Oxford Journals
=Afro-Asiatic=
File:Levant Homeland for Afroasiatic Languages.jpg]]
There are two hypotheses about the origin of the Proto-Afroasiatic languages, the Levant theory and the African continental theory. According to the theory of a homeland in Levant, the distribution was expanded to Africa in conjunction with the spread of agriculture.{{cite journal | vauthors = Diamond J, Bellwood P | title = Farmers and their languages: the first expansions | journal = Science | volume = 300 | issue = 5619 | pages = 597–603 | date = April 2003 | pmid = 12714734 | doi = 10.1126/science.1078208 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.1013.4523 | bibcode = 2003Sci...300..597D | s2cid = 13350469 }}{{cite book | vauthors = Bellwood P, Renfrew C | year = 2002 | title = Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis | publisher = McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research | location = Cambridge }} Terrazas Mata et al. (2013) have argued that the Proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers would have originated in the Middle East and subsequently migrated into the areas of North Africa, and the Horn of Africa.{{cite journal |last1=Terrazas Mata, A. Serrano Sánchez, C. and Benavente, M. |date=2013 |title=The Late Peopling of Africa According to Craniometric Data. A Comparison of Genetic and Linguistic Models |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281626493 |journal=Human Evolution |volume=28 |issue=1–2 |pages=1–12 |access-date=27 March 2017}} There are however many scholars who accept an African phylum language origin since five of the six Afro-Asiatic subfamilies are spoken on the African continent, and only one in Asia.{{cite journal |last1=Mc Call |first1=Daniel F. |title=The Afroasiatic Language Phylum: African in Origin, or Asian? |journal=Current Anthropology |date=1998 |volume=39 |issue=1 |pages=139–144 |doi=10.1086/204702 |jstor=10.1086/204702 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/204702 |issn=0011-3204|url-access=subscription }} Christopher Ehret, S.O. Y. Keita, and Paul Newman have also argued that archaeology does not indicate a spread of migrating farmers into northern Africa, but rather a gradual incorporation of animal husbandry into indigenous foraging cultures.{{cite journal |last1=Ehret |first1=Christopher |last2=Keita |first2=S. O. Y. |last3=Newman |first3=Paul |last4=Bellwood |first4=Peter |title=The Origins of Afroasiatic |journal=Science |date=2004 |volume=306 |issue=5702 |pages=1680–1681 |doi=10.1126/science.306.5702.1680c |jstor=3839746 |pmid=15576591 |s2cid=8057990 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3839746 |issn=0036-8075|url-access=subscription }}
=Nostratic =
Bomhard (2008)Bomhard, Allan R. (2008). Reconstructing Proto-Nostratic: Comparative Phonology, Morphology, and Vocabulary, 2 volumes. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-16853-4 suggested that the Proto-Nostratic language differentiated with the onset of the Levant Neolithic Revolution in 8,000 BC, and spread across Fertile crescent to Caucasus (Proto-Kartvelian), beyond Egypt and the Red Sea to Horn of Africa (Proto-Afro-Asiatic), to Iranian Plateau (Proto-Elamo-Dravidian), and to Central Asia (Proto-Eurasiatic, then Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Altaic, and Proto-Uralic in 5,000 BC).
=Elamo-Dravidian=
Elamo-Dravidian hypothetical language family is often associated with the spread of farming from the Fertile Crescent to the Indus Valley civilization. However, there is some disagreement regarding the linguistic relationship of Elamite with Dravidian languages. Genetic studies have detected a genetic link between Neolithic Iran and South Asians.{{Citation | last =Sylvester | first =Charles | year =2019 | title =Maternal genetic link of a south Dravidian tribe with native Iranians indicating bidirectional migration | journal =Annals of Human Biology | volume =46 | issue =2 | pages =175–180 | doi =10.1080/03014460.2019.1599067 | pmid =30909755 | s2cid =85516060 | url =https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332019814}}
=Transeurasian=
Martine Robbeets "Transeurasian" model, based on the Macro-Altaic languages (Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Japonic, and Koreanic), argues that Proto-Transeurasian was spoken in Xinglongwa culture in the west Liao river basin in 6th millennium BC, and differentiated to the daughter languages along with the spread of millet agriculture.Robbeets, M (2017) [https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/29648 The language of the Transeurasian farmers]. In Robbeets, M and Savelyev, A (eds), Language Dispersal Beyond Farming (pp. 93–116). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Robbeets, M (2020) [https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-45 The Transeurasian homeland: where, what and when?] In Robbeets, M, Hübler, N and Savelyev, A (eds), The Oxford Guide to the Transeurasian Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
=Japonic=
Many scholars believe that the Japonic language was brought from the Korean Peninsula to the Japanese archipelago around 700-300 BC by the Yayoi people who cultivated wet rice.Serafim, Leon A. (2008), "The uses of Ryukyuan in understanding Japanese language history", in Frellesvig, Bjarke; Whitman, John (eds.), Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects, John Benjamins, pp. 79–99, ISBN 978-90-272-4809-1.Vovin, Alexander (2017),“[https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-277 Origins of the Japanese Language]”, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.277. According to Martine Robbeets (2017), Japonic language originated from Proto-"Transeurasian" language (the common ancestor of Mongolic, Turkic, Tungusic, Japonic, and Koreanic), located in the Xinglongwa culture in the 6th millennium BC. She suggest Proto-Transeurasian people cultivated millet, but after branching to the "Japono-Koreanic" language family in the Liaodong Peninsula, Proto-Japonic was influenced by Para-Austronesian who cultivated wet rice in the Shandong Peninsula in the 2nd-3rd millennium BC, borrowed a large amount of vocabulary mainly related to agriculture, and then went south on the Korean Peninsula and entered the Japanese archipelago in the 1st millennium BC.Martine Irma Robbeets (2017): "[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320915864_Austronesian_influence_and_Transeurasian_ancestry_in_Japanese_A_case_of_farminglanguage_dispersal Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese: A case of farming/language dispersal]". Language Dynamics and Change, volume 7, issue 2, pages 201–251, {{doi|10.1163/22105832-00702005}} It is also proposed that the distribution of Japanese has expanded with the expansion of wet rice cultivation in the Japanese archipelago.De Boer, E., Yang, M., Kawagoe, A., & Barnes, G. (2020). [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/evolutionary-human-sciences/article/japan-considered-from-the-hypothesis-of-farmerlanguage-spread/BD91E69AEA3CCAEDC567519EF7F5AA97 Japan considered from the hypothesis of farmer/language spread.] Evolutionary Human Sciences, 2, E13. doi:10.1017/ehs.2020.7
=Austronesian=
It is proposed that the spread of Austronesian languages was driven by farming.Glover, Ian, 1934- Bellwood, Peter S. (2004). Southeast Asia : from prehistory to history. RoutledgeCurzon. ISBN 0-415-29777-X. OCLC 52720792.Donohue, Mark; Denham, Tim (2010). "[https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Farming-and-Language-in-Island-Southeast-Asia-Donohue-Denham/fa5118f6a9a15eaee0e3a4e594803163be9de341 Farming and Language in Island Southeast Asia: Reframing Austronesian History]". Current Anthropology. 51 (2): 223–256. doi:10.1086/650991. ISSN 0011-3204. JSTOR 10.1086/650991. S2CID 4815693.Bellwood, Peter (2006), "Asian Farming Diasporas? Agriculture, Languages, and Genes in China and Southeast Asia", Archaeology of Asia, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, pp. 96–118, doi:10.1002/9780470774670.ch6, ISBN 978-0-470-77467-0
=Sino-Tibetan=
Since 2019, phylogenetic studies of 50 Sino-Tibetan languages that have existed from ancient times to the present day have proved the hypothesis that the language family expanded with agricultural transmission. It is concluded that the Sino-Tibetan language family originated from the millet farming people located in North China 7,200 years ago.{{cite journal |last1=Laurent Sagart |last2=Guillaume Jacques |last3=Yunfan Lai |last4=Robin J. Ryder |last5=Valentin Thouzeau |last6=Simon J. Greenhill |last7=Johann-Mattis List |title=Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |date=May 2019 |volume=116 |issue=21 |pages=10317–10322 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1817972116 |pmid=31061123 |pmc=6534992 |bibcode=2019PNAS..11610317S |doi-access=free }}{{cite news |title=Origin of Sino-Tibetan language family revealed by new research |work=ScienceDaily |url=https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190506151822.htm |access-date=16 May 2021|date=May 6, 2019}}{{cite journal |last1=Zhang, M. |last2=Yan, S. |last3=Pan, W. |title=Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the Late Neolithic. |journal=Nature |date=24 April 2019 |volume=569 |issue=2019 |pages=112–115 |doi=10.1038/s41586-019-1153-z |pmid=31019300 |bibcode=2019Natur.569..112Z |s2cid=129946000 |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1153-z#citeas |access-date=16 May 2021|url-access=subscription }}{{cite news |title=Linguistics: The roots of the Sino-Tibetan language family |url=https://www.natureasia.com/en/research/highlight/12934 |access-date=16 May 2021 |work=nature asia |date=April 25, 2019 |archive-date=13 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210513142300/https://www.natureasia.com/en/research/highlight/12934 |url-status=dead }}
=Austroasiatic=
Several theories exist about the Urheimat of Austroasiatic languages; the Red River Delta,Sidwell, Paul. 2021. [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GSfNDgaDM_lzWrQxZ5w-Tas8aVKfT-Sj/view Austroasiatic Dispersal: the AA "Water-World" Extended]. SEALS 2021. (Video) the Mekong River region,Sidwell, Paul (2009). [https://www.jolr.ru/files/(51)jlr2010-4(117-134).pdf The Austroasiatic Central Riverine Hypothesis]. Keynote address, SEALS, XIX. the Zhu River region,van Driem, George. (2011). Rice and the Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien homelands. In N. J. Enfield (Ed.), Dynamics of Human Diversity: The Case of Mainland Southeast Asia (pp. 361-390). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. the Yangtze River region,Peiros, Ilia (2011). "[https://www.jolr.ru/files/(68)jlr2011-6(101-114).pdf Some thoughts on the problem of the Austro-Asiatic homeland]" (PDF). Journal of Language Relationship. Retrieved 4 August 2019. and the north of the Yangtze River.Zhang, Xiaoming; Liao, Shiyu; Qi, Xuebin; Liu, Jiewei; Kampuansai, Jatupol; Zhang, Hui; Yang, Zhaohui; Serey, Bun; Tuot, Sovannary (20 October 2015). [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283080042_Y-chromosome_diversity_suggests_southern_origin_and_Paleolithic_backwave_migration_of_Austro-_Asiatic_speakers_from_eastern_Asia_to_the_Indian_subcontinent_OPEN Y-chromosome diversity suggests southern origin and Paleolithic backwave migration of Austro- Asiatic speakers from eastern Asia to the Indian subcontinent OPEN.] 5.Blench, Roger. 2018. [https://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10524/52438/3/JSEALS_Special_Publication_3.pdf Waterworld: lexical evidence for aquatic subsistence strategies in Austroasiatic]. In Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Austroasiatic Linguistics, 174-193. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society Special Publication No. 3. University of Hawaiʻi Press. Proto-Austro-Asiatic speaking people were farmers who cultivated rice and millet and raised dogs, pigs, chickens, etc., but without millet cultivation (with only rice cultivation and some livestock farming), around 4500 BC, it reached Indochina and replaced native hunter-gatherers.Sidwell, Paul. 2015. Phylogeny, innovations, and correlations in the prehistory of Austroasiatic. Paper presented at the workshop Integrating inferences about our past: new findings and current issues in the peopling of the Pacific and South East Asia, 22–23 June 2015, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany.
=Uto-Aztecan=
It is suggested that Uto-Aztecan speakers expanded to Mesoamerica and Southwestern US with corn farming.Hill JH (2001) [https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1525/aa.2001.103.4.913 Proto-Uto-Aztecan: A community of cultivators in central Mexico?] Am Anthropol 103:913–934.Renfrew C, McMahon AMS, Trask RLBellwood P (2000) in Time Depth in Historical Linguistics, The time depth of major language families: An archaeologist's perspective, eds Renfrew C, McMahon AMS, Trask RL (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, UK), 1, pp 109–140.Bellwood P, Renfrew CMatson RG (2002) in Examining the Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis, The spread of maize agriculture in the U.S. Southwest, eds Bellwood P, Renfrew C (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, UK), pp 331–340.