1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
  4. Volume 35, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 35, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0920-9034
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9870
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

When communicating speakers map meaning onto form. It would thus seem obvious for languages to show a one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form, but this is often not the case. This perfect mapping, i.e. transparency, is indeed continuously violated in natural languages, giving rise to zero-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-one opaque correspondences between meaning and form. However, transparency is a mutating feature, which can be influenced by language contact. In this scenario languages tend to evolve and lose some of their opaque features, becoming more transparent. This study investigates transparency in a very specific contact situation, namely that of a creole, Haitian Creole, and its sub- and superstrate languages, Fongbe and French, within the Functional Discourse Grammar framework. We predict Haitian Creole to be more transparent than French and Fongbe and investigate twenty opacity features, divided into four categories, namely Redundancy (one-to-many), Fusion (many-to-one), Discontinuity (one meaning is split in two or more forms,) and Form-based Form (forms with no semantic counterpart: zero-to-one). The results indeed prove our prediction to be borne out: Haitian Creole only presents five opacity features out of twenty, while French presents nineteen and Fongbe nine. Furthermore, the opacity features of Haitian Creole are also present in the other two languages.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
2020-10-01
2024-12-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2012 Languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593569.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593569.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aksu-Koç, Ayhan A. & Dan I. Slobin
    1985 Acquisition of Turkish. InDan I. Slobin (ed), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data, 839–878. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arends, Jacques, Pieter Muysken, & Norval Smith
    1995 Pidgins and Creoles: An Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Audring, Jenny
    2009 Gender assignment and gender agreement. Morphology18: 93–116. 10.1007/s11525‑009‑9124‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-009-9124-y [Google Scholar]
  5. Bakker, Peter, Aymeric Daval-Markussen, Mikael Parkvall & Ingo Plag
    2011 Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages26(1). 5–42. 10.1075/jpcl.26.1.02bak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.26.1.02bak [Google Scholar]
  6. Bauer, Laurie
    2003 Introducing linguistic morphology (Second Edition). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bickel, Balthasar
    2011 Grammatical relations typology. InSong, Jae J. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook Of Linguistic Typology, 399–444. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Blasi, D. E., Michaelis, S. M., & Haspelmath, M.
    2017 Grammars are robustly transmitted even during the emergence of creole languages. Nature Human Behaviour1(10). 723–729. 10.1038/s41562‑017‑0192‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0192-4 [Google Scholar]
  9. Blom, Elma, Daniela Polišenská, & Fred Weerman
    2008 Articles, adjectives and age of onset: The acquisition of Dutch grammatical gender. Second Language Research24. 297–331. 10.1177/0267658308090183
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658308090183 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bonenfant, Jacques L.
    2011 History of Haitian Creole: from Pidgin to Lingua Franca and English Influence on the Language. Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning4(11). 27–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Corbett, Greville G.
    2006 Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dahl, Östen
    2004 The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/slcs.71
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.71 [Google Scholar]
  13. Davis, William D. & Stanley Dubinsky
    2004 The Grammar of Raising and Control: A Course in Syntactic Argumentation. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9780470755693
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470755693 [Google Scholar]
  14. DeGraff, Michel
    2001 Kreyòl Ayisien. InJohn Holm & Peter L. Patrick (eds.), Comparative Creole Syntax: Parallel Outlines of 18 Creole Grammars. London: Battlebridge Pubblications.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dereau, Léon
    1995 Cours de Kikongo. Namur: Wesmael-Charlier.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Dik, Simon C.
    1978 Functional Grammar. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Downing, Laura J. & Barbara Stiebels
    2012 Iconicity*. InJochen Trommer (ed.), The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence, 379–426. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Durie, Mark
    1985 A grammar of Acehnese: On the basis of a dialect of North Aceh. Dordrecht-Holland/Cinnaminson-USA: Foris Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gess, Randall, Chantal Lyche & Trudel Meisenburg
    2012 Phonological Variation in French, Illustrations from Three Continents. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/silv.11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.11 [Google Scholar]
  20. Glaude, Herby
    2012 Aspects de la syntaxe de l’Haïtien. Paris: Anibwé.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Hall, Robert A.
    1966 Pidgin and Creoles Languages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  22. Hengeveld, Kees
    2007 Parts-of-speech systems and morphological types, ACLC Working Papers2(1). 31–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 2011a Transparency in Functional Discourse Grammar. Linguistics in Amsterdam4. 1–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 2011b Epilogue: Degrees of transparency. Linguistics in Amsterdam4(2). 110–114.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hengeveld, Kees & Lachlan J. Mackenzie
    2008 Functional Discourse Grammar: a Typologically-based Theory of Language Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278107.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278107.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jespersen, Otto
    1917 Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: Høst.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Kusters, Wouter
    2003 Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection. PhD dissertation, Leiden University.
  28. Langacker, Ronald
    1977 Syntactic reanalysis. InCharles Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 56–139. Austin: University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lass, Roger
    1997 Historical Linguistics and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620928
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620928 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lefebvre, Claire, Hélène Magliore-Holly, & Nanie Piou
    1982 Syntaxe de l’Haïtien. USA: Karoma Publishers INC.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Lefebvre, Claire & Anne-Marie Brousseau
    2002 A Grammar of Fongbe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110880182
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110880182 [Google Scholar]
  32. Leufkens, Sterre
    2013 The transparency of creoles, Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages28 (2). 323–362. 10.1075/jpcl.28.2.03leu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.28.2.03leu [Google Scholar]
  33. 2015 Transparency in Language: A Typological Study. Utrecht: LOT.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lightfoot, David W.
    1979 Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Lupyan, Gary & Rick Dale
    2010 Language structure is partly determined by social structure, PLoS ONE5 (1). 1–10. 10.1371/journal.pone.0008559
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008559 [Google Scholar]
  36. McWorther, John H.
    1998 Identifying the creole prototype: vindicating a typological class. Language74, No.4. 788–818. 10.2307/417003
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417003 [Google Scholar]
  37. McWhorter, John
    2001 The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic Typology5. 125–166. 10.1515/lity.2001.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2001.001 [Google Scholar]
  38. McWhorter, John H.
    2011 Linguistic Simplicity and Complexity. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. doi:  10.1515/9781934078402
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781934078402 [Google Scholar]
  39. Miestamo, Matti
    2006 On the feasibility of complexity metrics, InKerge Krista & Maria Maren Sepper (eds.), FinEst Linguistics: Conference Proceeding of The Annual Finnish and Estonian Conference of Linguistics May 6–7 2004, Eesti Filoloogia Osakonna Toimtited8, 11–26. Tallinn: TLÜ
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Mufwene, Salikoko S.
    1996 The founder principle in creole genesis. Diachronica13:1. 83–134. 10.1075/dia.13.1.05muf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.13.1.05muf [Google Scholar]
  41. 2015 Pidgin and Creole Languages. International Encyclopaedia of the Social and Behavioural Sciences (Second Edition). 133–145. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑08‑097086‑8.52014‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.52014-5 [Google Scholar]
  42. Omar, Margaret
    1973 The acquisition of Egyptian Arabic as a native language. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110819335
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110819335 [Google Scholar]
  43. Peterson, John
    2011 A grammar of Kharia. A South Munda language. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004187207.i‑474
     https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004187207.i-474 [Google Scholar]
  44. Seuren, Pieter & Herman Wekker
    1986 Semantic transparency as a factor in creole genesis. InMuysken, Pieter & Norval Smith (eds.), Substrata versus Universals in Creole Genesis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 57–70. 10.1075/cll.1.05seu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cll.1.05seu [Google Scholar]
  45. Siegel, Jeff
    2008 The emergence of pidgin and creole languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Slobin, Dan I.
    1977 Language change in childhood and history. InJohn Macnamara (ed.), Language Learning and Language Thought. New York: Academic Press. 185–214.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Trudgill, Peter
    2011 Sociolinguistic typology: social determinants of linguistics complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Valdman, Albert
    2015 Haitian Creole: Structure, Variation, Status, Origin. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Velde, Freek van de
    2012 PP extraction and extraposition in Functional Discourse Grammar, Language Sciences34. 433–454. 10.1016/j.langsci.2012.02.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2012.02.007 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
Loading
Transparency and language contact
Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 35, 218 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
/content/journals/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
/content/journals/10.1075/jpcl.00060.seg
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Fongbe; French; Functional Discourse Grammar; Haitian Creole; language contact; transparency

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error