Comments on: Phylogenetics, cultural evolution and horizontal transmission

By: L

Sun, 04 Apr 2010 17:28:37 +0000

As far as linguistics is concerned, this mostly just reaffirms accepted ideas. Phylogenetic principles were imported into biology from linguistics in the first place, as you note; historical linguists since the 19th century have taken vertical transmission to be overwhelmingly dominant in the "core" vocabulary and morphology of a language, and have known that we can generally reconstruct trees despite the presence of borrowing. (What's relatively new, in fact, is the realization that there are a handful of unambiguously mixed "hybrid" languages, such as Michif or Copper Island Aleut, that simply don't fit a cladistic model.) More linguistically interesting are the studies cited in the first paper, on North Coast New Guinea and Africa, in support of the idea that cultural branching tends to correspond pretty well to linguistic branching. Such work goes some way towards justifying efforts to reconstruct Proto-Indo-European mythology, and more generally the use of Wörter und Sachen techniques, which have sometimes come in for severe criticism. But one wonders how applicable these principles are to parts of the world where empires and large religions have played a greater role.

By: German Dziebel

German Dziebel — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:40:17 +0000

David: “Anthropologists give a lot of attention to the minutiae of kinship systems and mythology, which may well be mainly transmitted vertically…”

Very accurate. See my book “The Genius of Kinship: The Phenomenon of Kinship and the Global Diversity of Kinship terminologies” (2007) for the most recent attempt at interpreting global variation in kinship structures from the perspective of vertical transmission.

By: Bayes

Bayes — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 11:07:03 +0000

@ TGGP: The paper was basically looking at population-level variation in behaviour. So the cultural similarities and differences among populations are primarily the result of a combination of within-group information transmission and population fissioning.

@ Michael Blume: Thanks Michael. Yeah, I’m quite interested in the role of cultural variance. I’m planning on writing a post in the near future.

@ DavidB: Well, the data sets are a mixture of both types you mention. From my memory, the data sets included Neolithic pottery and projectile points, among many others. So I think they paid adequate attention to technology. Not so sure about food production, so I’ll have a look.

@ John Emerson: I’d be interested to read the paper (or article) you mentioned.

By: John Emerson

John Emerson — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:22:51 +0000

Something I read recently says that the oxcart and horsecart diffused so rapidly once invented that it may never be possible to know where exactly it was invented. As means of mobility, of course, they were designed for diffusion, as it were. And they were useful in a variety of contexts, and many times superior to the next best method. (Very crude oxcarts were used in the American-Canadian West well into the 19th century, and probably are still used today in some places. Oxcarts are like trucks in low gear, very slow but very powerful and usable on bad or no roads.)

By: DavidB

DavidB — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:06:52 +0000

Hmm. I suspect that much depends on how cultural traits are identified. Anthropologists give a lot of attention to the minutiae of kinship systems and mythology, which may well be mainly transmitted vertically, but maybe less attention to technology and food production, which are often transmitted horizontally. E.g. the main food crop among the numerous isolated tribes of New Guinea is the sweet potato, which arrived comparatively recently from S America. Likewise manioc/cassava in West Africa, and tobacco everywhere.

By: Michael Blume

Michael Blume — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:36:27 +0000

Thanks for the sound post, which I promptly retweeted! :-)

From the perspective of evolutionary studies on religion, I would suggest to include cultural variance in the discussion of human cultural and genetic transmission. Certain religious groups as i.e. the Amish or Haredi Jews managed to develop stronger fences preventing much transmission from the outside while enhancing biological and cultural transmission to large numbers of offspring. Religiously liberal or secular groups are usually “more open” and (on average) less fertile.

Best wishes from Germany!

By: TGGP

TGGP — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 04:34:58 +0000

“Vertical intergroup transmission”. Is that the group-selection equivalent of individual reproduction with inheritance?

By: Shawn

Shawn — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 04:15:53 +0000

I guess, haha

By: Razib

Razib — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:51:26 +0000

shawn, your comment has the same structure as a lot of spam! :-)

By: Shawn

Shawn — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:30:23 +0000

Check this out if you haven’t yet seen it, man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV3Ws7pyJUI&feature=related

By: Razib

Razib — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 02:35:27 +0000

i already posted on this at *discover blogs*, but i think the new found importance of vertical transmission has important implications for archaeogenetics….