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.

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.

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 study found that the more language speakers there are, the more phonemes in the language. In addition, the more language speakers, the more vowels and consonants. While some language families have more phonemes than others, this did not affect the results. The goal of this paper was only to illustrate a link between the two and the authors hope this work encourages further examination into this relationship.

This study found that the more language speakers there are, the more phonemes in the language. In addition, the more language speakers, the more vowels and consonants. While some language families have more phonemes than others, this did not affect the results. The goal of this paper was only to illustrate a link between the two and the authors hope this work encourages further examination into this relationship.

Using ethnography, historical linguistics, paleoanthropology, and speech biomechanics, the present study examines the relationship between labiodentals and the post-Neolithic period with the introduction of agriculture and softer diets. The results offer support for the linguist, Charles Hockett's, hypothesis that the shift in bite configuration in the post-Neolithic period, as well as the persistence of overbite and overjet, facilitates and makes the articulation of labiodentals more prevalent. Using cross-cultural comparison, findings also reveal that societies that produce their food are more likely to evolve and keep labiodentals than those that are not food-producing. Contact with other societies is also a mode by which societies gain labiodentals. Lastly, the expansion of agricultural and food processing technology over time has been imperative to labiodental articulations.

Population size is generally assumed to play a pivotal role in the evolution of languages and cultures, but the expected patterns and potential mechanisms of change are unsettled. Theoretical models are limited by this uncertainty because they require making prior assumptions about language evolution. Using a sample of 20 Polynesian languages, authors test the effect of population size on the gain, loss, and total change of basic vocabulary words.