# Investigating Lexical Change through Cross-Linguistic Colexification Patterns

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13407 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.13407/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 65 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Diachronic Word Embeddings Reveal Statistical Laws of Semantic Change](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1605.09096/) (2016)
- [Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1507.04544/) (2015)
- [Conceptual similarity and communicative need shape colexification: an experimental study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.11024/) (2021)
- [On the universal structure of human lexical semantics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1504.07843/) (2015)
- [Polysemy and brevity versus frequency in language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.00812/) (2019)
- [Semantic Change and Semantic Stability: Variation is Key](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.05760/) (2019)

## Abstract (arXiv)

One of the most intriguing features of language is its constant change, with ongoing shifts in how meaning is expressed. Despite decades of research, the factors that determine how and why meanings evolve remain only partly understood. Colexification -- the phenomenon of expressing multiple distinct concepts using the same word form -- serves as a valuable window onto the dynamics of meaning change across languages. Here, we apply phylogenetic comparative models to dictionary data from three language families, Austronesian, Indo-European, and Uralic, in order to shed light on the evolutionary dynamics underlying the colexification of concept pairs. We assess the effects of three predictors: associativity, borrowability, and usage frequency. Our results show that more closely related concept pairs are colexified across a larger portion of the family tree and exhibit slower rates of change. In contrast, concept pairs that are more frequent and more prone to borrowing tend to change more rapidly and are less often colexified. We also find considerable differences between the language families under study, suggesting that areal and cultural factors may play a role.