Fig. 1.
Overview of linguistic and genetic similarity. (A) Schematic illustration of possible scenarios of matches and mismatches in the transmission of genes and linguistic traits. Genetic (demographic) history is represented by solid black lines that differentiate groups of people (represented by human shapes). Linguistic history is represented by colored lines, differentiating five language families (a–e). The linguistic histories sometimes move in parallel with the demographic history and sometimes not. Numbers correspond to the different cases distinguished in B and C: 1. linguistic and genetic (matching) enclave; 2. linguistic mismatch (linguistic enclave); 3. genetic mismatch (genetic enclave); 4. population with genetic distances aligned with their linguistic relatives (matching profile); 5. population with genetic distances misaligned to their linguistic relatives (mismatching profile). (B) Examples of a heuristic associated with the three enclave cases shown in A. For each target population, we display the two smallest FST distances, respectively, to a population from the same family and a population from a different language family, together with their geographic distance. Himba (Atlantic-Congo family) fulfills the criteria of a matching enclave; Hungarian (Uralic family) fulfills the criteria of a linguistic enclave; Jewish Georgian (Kartvelian family) fulfills the criteria of a genetic enclave. (C) Examples of aligned and misaligned cases shown in A. For each population, the FST distribution within speakers of the same language family is compared with the FST distribution between the speakers of other language families. The yellow dot indicates the median. Kalmyk (Mongolic-Khitan) is aligned (i.e., is genetically closer) to speakers of the same language family; Azeri Azerbaijani (Turkic family) is misaligned to speakers of the same language family. FST distances are displayed on a logarithmically transformed scale.