Linked from

The 13 pages that link to Glottochronology, each with the reason it gives.

• Historical linguisticsCompared with: Its contested assumptions show the limits of dating change from word lists alone.

• Comparative linguisticsRelated: It extends comparison toward dating, though its assumptions remain disputed.

• Linguistic paleontologyCompared with: Its disputed dating assumptions differ from evidence based on reconstructed cultural vocabulary.

• Proto-Bantu languageCompared with: Its assumptions have made proposed dates for Proto-Bantu's breakup controversial.

• Joseph GreenbergRelated: Its assumptions about lexical change echo the challenges facing Greenberg’s distant comparisons.

• Evolution of languagesCompared with: Its assumptions and limitations show why language histories cannot be dated by word counts alone.

• Sound correspondenceRelated: It relies on cognate judgments, while sound correspondences help establish those judgments.

• Nostratic languagesRelated: Dating proposed Nostratic splits has sometimes relied on this contested technique.

• LexicostatisticsBroader topic: It turns lexicostatistical cognate percentages into proposed dates of separation.

• Language divergenceCompared with: Its proposed dating approach highlights the difficulty of assigning a single pace to language change.

• Oto-Manguean languagesRelated: Its estimates have informed proposals about when the family diversified, though the method is disputed.

• Morris SwadeshBroader topic: Swadesh developed and promoted this quantitative approach to language divergence.

• Alexander VovinCompared with: Vovin criticized its use in arguments about Japanese language origins.