Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumComparative Reading Analysis

Passage A
In the mid-twentieth century, linguist Morris Swadesh proposed glottochronology, a quantitative method designed to determine the chronological divergence of related languages. Swadesh hypothesized that "basic vocabulary"—core lexical items representing universal human concepts such as anatomical terms, low numerals, and fundamental natural phenomena—decays at a statistically constant rate across all human languages, analogous to radioactive isotope decay in carbon dating. By calculating the percentage of shared cognates in basic vocabulary lists between two related languages, researchers believed they could calculate precisely when those languages had diverged from a common ancestral proto-language.

However, historical linguists soon uncovered fundamental flaws in glottochronology's core premise. Empirical studies demonstrated that the rate of lexical replacement is not universal; social factors, intensive language contact, geographical isolation, and cultural prestige can dramatically accelerate or decelerate vocabulary turnover. For instance, Icelandic has retained basic lexical items with remarkable fidelity over a millennium, whereas languages subject to intense borrowing, such as English after the Norman Conquest, underwent rapid lexical replacement. Although glottochronology rightly introduced quantitative methods to historical linguistics, its reliance on an unvarying rate of change rendered its absolute date estimates largely unreliable.

Passage B
Recent advances in computational historical linguistics have revitalized the quest to reconstruct language family phylogenies and estimate divergence dates. Rather than relying on the discredited assumption of a universal, constant clock across all languages, contemporary researchers employ Bayesian phylogenetic methods adapted from evolutionary biology. These probabilistic models accommodate rate heterogeneity, explicitly allowing the tempo of linguistic change to vary across different branches of a language family tree, across individual lexical traits, and across distinct historical epochs.

Furthermore, Bayesian approaches integrate archaeological and historical anchor dates as calibration points, constraining the plausible parameter space for chronological estimates. By sampling millions of possible evolutionary trees and parameter combinations, these models generate posterior probability distributions that reflect statistical uncertainty rather than offering a single, brittle date estimate. While some traditional linguists remain skeptical of applying computational algorithms to human cultural phenomena, Bayesian phylogenetic analysis has successfully resolved longstanding debates, such as estimating the timeline of the Indo-European expansion. Crucially, these computational models demonstrate that quantitative precision does not require the oversimplified premise of constant linguistic change.

Based on the passages, both the author of Passage A and the author of Passage B would be most likely to agree with which one of the following assertions?

  1. A
    Archaeological evidence provides the only dependable method for establishing anchor dates in linguistic reconstruction.
  2. B
    External factors such as cultural contact and borrowing exert a greater influence on lexical turnover than does geographical isolation.
  3. The premise of a fixed, universal rate of lexical turnover is inadequate for reliably dating the divergence of related languages.Answer
  4. D
    Traditional historical linguists have universally rejected the application of computational models to the study of human language evolution.
  5. E
    Basic lexical items representing core human concepts are largely immune to replacement across different language families.

Answer

Both authors agree that a methodology assuming a fixed, universal rate of lexical replacement is inadequate for reliably determining when languages diverged.
The correct answer identifies a shared point of agreement: Passage A notes that glottochronology's 'reliance on an unvarying rate of change rendered its absolute date estimates largely unreliable,' while Passage B characterizes the assumption of a 'universal, constant clock' as 'discredited' and 'oversimplified.' Both authors thus agree that assuming a constant rate of lexical turnover is insufficient for accurate linguistic dating.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Passage A's assessment of constant rates of lexical change.
Passage A states that empirical evidence disproved the assumption of a universal rate of lexical replacement, making glottochronology's date estimates largely unreliable.
Establishing Passage A's core critique of glottochronology is necessary to identify shared viewpoints.
2
Analyze Passage B's view on the assumption of a constant rate of change.
Passage B describes a universal constant clock as a 'discredited assumption' and an 'oversimplified premise,' emphasizing that modern Bayesian models explicitly account for rate variation.
Determining Passage B's stance allows direct comparison with Passage A's perspective.
3
Synthesize the two viewpoints to find the point of mutual agreement.
Both authors agree that linguistic dating cannot reliably depend on the assumption that lexical replacement occurs at a constant, uniform rate.
Comparative reading point-of-agreement questions require finding an overlapping claim directly supported by textual evidence in both passages.

Key Concept

Identifying points of mutual agreement and shared foundational assumptions across paired comparative texts.
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Comparative Reading Analysis

More questions from this topic