This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

Utilizing two independently-coded databases representing 3700+ languages, authors investigate whether cold ecologies or otherwise-desiccated ecologies are less amenable to complex tonality in language. Languages with complex tonality are primarily found to be located in tropical regions and generally absent in desiccated environments, regardless of latitude.

This study examines whether language construction, specifically the number of consonant-vowel syllables, will be related to the environment and literacy of a society. Empirical analysis suggests that consonant-vowel syllables are more common in warmer climates and less common in written languages.

This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

This study examines whether language construction, specifically the number of consonant-vowel syllables, will be related to the environment and literacy of a society. Empirical analysis suggests that consonant-vowel syllables are more common in warmer climates and less common in written languages.

In this paper, the authors argue against the findings presented in Hay & Bauer (2007) which suggest a positive correlation between population size and phoneme inventory size in languages. In order to do so, they highlight some methodological issues in the previous study, as well as other studies addressing similar questions. To address these issues, the authors conducted their own study using a larger and more representative sample of phoneme inventories drawn from the PHOIBLE knowledge base, and applied a more rigorous statistical analysis using a hierarchical mixed model. The results indicate that correlations between population size and phoneme inventory size are quite small when compared to differences among language family groups, and that the phoneme-population relationship fluctuates around zero between families, suggesting that any relationship between population and phoneme inventory size does not generalize to language as a whole. The author concludes that the correlations seen between population and phoneme inventories are likely to be artifacts, and do not find compelling reason to consider population size as a potential causal factor in the development of phonological systems.

In this paper, the authors argue against the findings presented in Hay & Bauer (2007) which suggest a positive correlation between population size and phoneme inventory size in languages. In order to do so, they highlight some methodological issues in the previous study, as well as other studies addressing similar questions. To address these issues, the authors conducted their own study using a larger and more representative sample of phoneme inventories drawn from the PHOIBLE knowledge base, and applied a more rigorous statistical analysis using a hierarchical mixed model. The results indicate that correlations between population size and phoneme inventory size are quite small when compared to differences among language family groups, and that the phoneme-population relationship fluctuates around zero between families, suggesting that any relationship between population and phoneme inventory size does not generalize to language as a whole. The author concludes that the correlations seen between population and phoneme inventories are likely to be artifacts, and do not find compelling reason to consider population size as a potential causal factor in the development of phonological systems.

This article examines the universal tendency for languages, regardless of their historical relationships, to develop similar words for mother and father on the basis of nursery forms. Findings suggest that Ma, Na, Pa, and Ta are significantly more common sound classes denoting the mother or father.

In this paper, the authors argue against the findings presented in Hay & Bauer (2007) which suggest a positive correlation between population size and phoneme inventory size in languages. In order to do so, they highlight some methodological issues in the previous study, as well as other studies addressing similar questions. To address these issues, the authors conducted their own study using a larger and more representative sample of phoneme inventories drawn from the PHOIBLE knowledge base, and applied a more rigorous statistical analysis using a hierarchical mixed model. The results indicate that correlations between population size and phoneme inventory size are quite small when compared to differences among language family groups, and that the phoneme-population relationship fluctuates around zero between families, suggesting that any relationship between population and phoneme inventory size does not generalize to language as a whole. The author concludes that the correlations seen between population and phoneme inventories are likely to be artifacts, and do not find compelling reason to consider population size as a potential causal factor in the development of phonological systems.