German: &quot;Victor, there are several linguistic...

German: "Victor, there are several linguistic studies that argue for the relatively recent (within hundreds and a few thousands of years) origin of tones in Asia and America. Parallel evolution and diffusion are common processes that account for the current distribution of tones."

I want to look more deeply into the literature on this issue when I get a chance. However, it's important for you (and Maju) to understand that for me one of the most important factors in evaluating a cultural attribute is its worldwide distribution. Unfortunately, the worldwide distribution of most aspects of culture are not widely known or studied. The WALS maps represent a very exciting new breakthrough, however, and the importance of this publication should not be taken for granted.

From what I've noticed on the WALS maps I've looked over so far is that almost all the traits they've mapped tend to be distributed almost randomly, or at least that's how it looks. Such a distribution is consistent with the pattern one would expect if these traits are largely determined by parallel evolution and diffusion.

The pattern we see for tone language is dramatically different, at least for the Old World. It is highly structured. And for me that must mean something. It's hard for me to see this as simply a coincidence.

There is no question that diffusion has taken place among the languages of greater SE Asia, and that at least some of the wide distribution of tone in this region is due to that. But if that's the whole story, then why don't we see similar patterns of of tone language diffusion in other parts of Eurasia?

There have been a great many studies of every aspect of linguistics by many investigators and every conceivable theory seems to have been promoted at one time or another, usually based on assumptions about how language worked or how the brain worked or what was universal, etc. The WALS maps are different, because, as with Cantometrics (which that whole approach strongly resembles) we see real evidence, and on a worldwide scale. This is new and exciting and because of my experiences with Cantometrics I feel very much at home with it.

I'm not saying that further examination of the details of tone language and its history are not important and I intend, when I get the time, to look into that. The map by itself proves nothing, clearly. But it does look to me at this point as though the correlation I see could be an important historical clue and I will certainly not abandon this line of research simply because some linguists might think otherwise.