It's not a question of what the language was derived from, it's a question of what prompted it to be developed.
It's not where it drew it features from, or what its ancestor was, or what's it's most like. It's a question of what caused the developers to create a language, not where they got the new language's feature from.
Comments
The line from Lisp to Ruby should go from Lisp to Perl - all the Lispy features Ruby has - as I understand it - were lifted via Perl...
I'd argue that the idea of a first-class "symbol" data type is one of Ruby's best features, and one that was directly copied from Lisp.
I think the Lispy features were more derived Smalltalk than Perl...
It's not a question of what the language was derived from, it's a question of what prompted it to be developed.
It's not where it drew it features from, or what its ancestor was, or what's it's most like. It's a question of what caused the developers to create a language, not where they got the new language's feature from.
Both Perl & Smalltalk provided lispy influences/features to Ruby. For eg. map & collect being same method (ie. aliases) - http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Array.html#M000249