Q. Why should there be a correlation between linguistic and genetic diversity?
A. We inherit language and genes from our parents.
Q. Why are genetic data a useful tool for linguists?
A. Linguistic, genetic, archaeological, and climatological perspectives converge to form very persuasive models that explain the prehistory of language.
Q. Why did you focus on the Y-chromosome?
A. Autosomal markers and whole genome research require sophisticated statistical analysis to explain the data. Y-chromosome and mtDNA data are more transparent because the data can be analyzed with climate data and the archeological record. The Y-chromosome provides more resolution than mtDNA because it is a larger marker, 60 million base pairs compared to 16 thousand. As such, it provides a more detailed picture of human prehistory.
Q. What do you have against statistical models?
A. Why do political advertisements always feature a statistic? Because a statistic will say whatever you want it to say. The problem with statistical models is they tend to confirm what we already know or believe. With empirical data such as the frequency of Y-chromosome mutations, or carbon 14 dating results, or the presence of certain isotopes from core samples, you can build models of language prehistory that are far more transparent.
Q. Does the Y-chromosome only present the evolutionary of men and ignore that of women?
A. Molecular markers all seem to carry the same story: language thrives and survives because humanity has found a way to thrive and survive. For the purpose of building language models, the difference in molecular markers is generally a matter of resolution and transparency.
Q. Is your work about race?
A. No. I am interested in the evolution of linguistic variation.
Q. Is your work about Nostratic?
A. No. Regarding classification I take a conservative approach and follow consensus, such as Glottlog or Ethnologue. The proposed super language families or phylums cannot be proven with linguistic tools.
Q. What was your original research contribution to deciphering the prehistory of language?
A. I identified 110 linguistically informative Y-chromosome mutations that carry the prehistory of language.
Q. Why did you do this?
A. It was thrilling to sail into an uncharted linguistic frontier, to go where no linguist has gone before. The project also allowed me to remain professionally active while solving a childcare crisis at home.
Q. Were you qualified to do what you did? After all, you are a linguist and not a geneticist.
A. My undergraduate course work at the University of Colorado included biology, chemistry, and anthropology. Deciphering the relevant genetic, archaeological and climate data has not been so much a technical hurdle for me, but an organizational nightmare.
Q. How did you work?
A. To overcome the organizational hurdle, I constructed about 25 databases. My databases allowed me to report frequency data for Y-chromosome mutations. Then I determined why a mutation attains a significant frequency among those that speak a certain language family or language branch. I primarily utilized archaeological and climate perspectives to make this determination.
Q. Anything else you want to say?
A. I hate phonology.