In the early twentieth century, historical linguists studying the classification of indigenous Caucasian languages largely endorsed the macro-family hypothesis, positing that Northwest Caucasian and Northeast Caucasian descended from a common genealogical ancestor termed 'Proto-North Caucasian.' Proponents cited shared typological features, particularly complex consonant inventories, agglutinative morphology, and ergative alignment. Subsequent comparative analysis, however, established that the two language families share virtually no cognate root morphemes across core vocabulary—such as anatomical terms and lower numerals—that cannot be explained by areal borrowing. Because establishing a valid genetic relationship requires demonstrating regular sound correspondences across inherited core lexical items rather than shared structural typologies, contemporary consensus holds that the two families developed independently in geographic proximity.
Which of the following assertions is most strongly supported by the passage?
- AGeographic proximity between distinct speech communities inevitably leads to the complete replacement of core vocabulary through lexical borrowing.
- Structural and typological commonalities alone are insufficient to demonstrate that two language families share a common ancestor.Cevap
- CLinguistic convergence occurs more rapidly among agglutinative languages than among languages with isolating grammatical systems.
- DNorthwest Caucasian and Northeast Caucasian possess fewer consonant phonemes today than did their hypothesized ancestor.
- EDemonstrating regular sound correspondences in anatomical terms is sufficient to prove that areal borrowing has occurred.