A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years

Assembled from 27 blocks · 1 evidence · 15 related

1. Story
2. Sagart and colleagues published a dated phylogeny of Sino-Tibetan based on a curated cognate dataset, obtaining a root age of the order of seven thousand years before present and associating the family's origin with early millet agriculture in northern China. The date is materially older than that reported by a second phylogenetic study of the same family published in the same year.
3. Knowledge
4. Bayesian phylogenetic dating of language families
5. Sino-Tibetan
6. A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years
7. A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years
8. Connections
9. A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years
10. Sino-Tibetan
11. Bayesian phylogenetic dating of language families
12. A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years
13. Sino-Tibetan
14. Bayesian phylogenetic dating of language families
15. The comparative method
16. A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years
17. A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years
18. The comparative method
19. Glottochronology
20. A language tree is tested against a settlement chronology
21. A Bayesian phylogeny dates Indo-European to the Anatolian Neolithic
22. Phylogeography puts the Indo-European homeland in Anatolia
23. A hybrid model is proposed for the Indo-European origin
24. A dated phylogeny puts Sino-Tibetan at roughly seven thousand years
25. A second phylogeny puts the same family at roughly six thousand years
26. Evidence
27. Supports the reported Sino-Tibetan root age of the order of seven thousand years before present and the association with northern Chinese millet agriculture. V55 verification basis: this session had no access to any source — WebFetch was egress-blocked for every host attempted and the WebSearch budget was exhausted before authoring — so the cited work was not retrieved, and no page, volume or figure quoted from it was re-checked. The age is given as an order of magnitude, not as the paper's point estimate or interval; volume from standing knowledge, page range omitted rather than guessed.