1887
Volume 1, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2452-1949
  • E-ISSN: 2452-2147
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Typological approaches involving the study of Creole languages have long triggered an unsettled dispute among creolists. Some claim that Creoles do not differ from non-Creole languages, and can only be defined socio-historically and not structurally, while others claim that Creoles are ʺdistinctʺ in many respects, and/or form a special class with specific typological properties. In an attempt to settle this dispute, Bakker et al. (2011) drew on a phylogenetic approach to provide evidence that Creoles form a structurally distinguishable subgroup within the world’s languages. However, their methods and conclusions appear to be questionable, as they are likely to be flawed. Standing as a challenge to the aforementioned article, this paper will reconsider their methodological and empirical approaches by re-evaluating the sets of Creoles and non-Creoles on the basis of identical or near-identical principles. It will ultimately appear that their conclusion could be an artefact of the selection as well.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/le.1.1.04fon
2017-06-29
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aboh, Enoch O.
    2016 Creole Distinctiveness: A dead end. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages31(2). 400–418. doi: 10.1075/jpcl.31.2.07abo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.31.2.07abo [Google Scholar]
  2. Aboh, Enoch and Michel DeGraff
    . To appear. A null theory of Creole formation, based on Universal Grammar. In Ian Roberts ed. The Oxford Handbook on Universal Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ansaldo, Umberto
    2004 Contact, typology and the speaker: The essentials of language. Language Sciences26: 485–494. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2003.11.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2003.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ansaldo, Umberto and Stephen Matthews
    2007 Deconstructing creole: The rationale. In Umberto Ansaldo , Stephen Matthews and Lisa Lim , eds.Deconstructing Creole. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–18. doi: 10.1075/tsl.73.02ans
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.73.02ans [Google Scholar]
  5. Bakker, Peter , Aymeric Daval-Markussen , Mikael Parkvall and Ingo Plag
    2011 Creoles are typologically distinct from non-Creoles. In Parth Bhatt and Tonjes Veenstra , eds.Creoles and Typology, Special issue ofJournal of Pidgin and Creole Languages26(1): 5–42. doi: 10.1075/jpcl.26.1.02bak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.26.1.02bak [Google Scholar]
  6. Bakker, Peter
    2016 You’ve got Gungbe, but we’ve got the numbers: Feature pools show that Creoles are still typologically distinct. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages31(2): 419–434. doi: 10.1075/jpcl.31.2.08bak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.31.2.08bak [Google Scholar]
  7. Bandelt, H.-J. and A. Dress
    1992 Split-decomposition: A new and useful approach to phylogenetic analysis of distance data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution1 : 242–252. doi: 10.1016/1055‑7903(92)90021‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/1055-7903(92)90021-8 [Google Scholar]
  8. Benveniste, Emile
    1993 [1966]Problèmes de linguistique générale, I. Paris : Gallimard.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bickerton, Derek
    1975Dynamics of a Creole System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 1981Roots of Language. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bickerton, Derek and Talmy Givón
    1976 Pidginization and language change: From SXV and VSX to SVX. In Sanford B. Steever , Carol A. Walker and Salikoko S. Mufwene , eds.Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax. Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago. 9–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Binger, Louis-Gustave
    1886Essai sur la langue Bambara, parlée dans le Kaarta et dans le Bélédougou, suivi d'un vocabulaire. Paris: Maisonneuve Frères et Ch. Leclerc.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bray, D. S.
    1909The Brahui Language. Vol. 1: Introduction and Grammar. ***Calcutta. Reprinted Delhi 1986: Gian.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chaudenson, Robert
    2003La créolisation: théorie, applications, implications. Paris: L'Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Christaller, Johann Gottlieb
    1875A Grammar of the Asante and Fante Language called Tshi: Based on the Akuapem Dialect with Reference to the Other (Akan and Fante) Dialects. Basel: Basel Evangelical Missionary Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. DeGraff, Michel
    2001 Morphology in Creole genesis: Linguistics and ideology. In Michael Kenstowicz , ed.Ken Hale: A Life in Language. MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2003 Against Creole Exceptionalism. Language79(2): 391–410. doi: 10.1353/lan.2003.0114
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0114 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2005 Linguists’ most dangerous myth: The fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism. Language in Society34(4): 533–591. doi: 10.1017/S0047404505050207
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050207 [Google Scholar]
  19. Everett, Dan
    1986 Pirahã. In Desmond C. Derbyshire and Geoffrey K. Pullum , eds.Handbook of Amazonian Languages, Vol.1. Berlin: Moutin de Gruyter. 200–325. doi: 10.1515/9783110850819.200
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110850819.200 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fon Sing, Guillaume , Jean Leoue and Corinna Bartoletti
    2011 Creoles are not typologically distinct from non-Creoles. Paper presented at theGRGC Workshop 2011, Creole Grammars – Linguistic Theories. Paris. 23–24June 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Fon Sing, Guillaume and Jean Leoue
    2012 Creoles are not typologically distinct from non-Creoles. Paper presented at the9th Creolistics Workshop, Contact languages in a global context: Past and present. Aarhus University, Denmark. 11–13April 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
    and Adrian C. Edwards 2005A Grammar of Mina. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110893908
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110893908 [Google Scholar]
  23. Givón, Talmy
    1973 The time-axis phenomenon. Language49: 890–925. doi: 10.2307/412067
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412067 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hancock, Ian
    1987 A preliminary classification of the anglophone Atlantic creoles with syntactic data from thirty-three representative dialects. In Glenn Gilbert , ed.Pidgin and Creole Languages: Essays in Memory of John E. Reineck. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press. 264–333.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Haspelmath, Martin , Matthew Dryer , David Gil and Bernard Comrie
    eds. 2005The World Atlas of Linguistic Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Heath, Jeffrey
    1998A Grammar of Koyra Chiini: The Songhay of Timbuktu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Holm, John and Peter L. Patrick
    eds. 2007Comparative Creole Syntax: Parallel Outlines of 18 Creole Grammars. London: Battlebridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Huson, Daniel H. and David Bryant
    2006 Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23(2): 254–267. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msj030
    https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msj030 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kay, Paul and Gillian Sankoff
    1974 A language-universals approach to pidgins and creoles. In David DeCamp and Ian F. Hancock , eds.Pidgins and Creoles: Current Trends and Prospects. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. 46–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, Charles
    and Sandra A. Thompson 1981Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Maia, António da Silva
    1964Lições de gramática de quimbundo: portugês e banto, dialecto omumbuim. Cucujães: Escola Tipográfica.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Maslova, Elena
    2003A Grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197174
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197174 [Google Scholar]
  33. Markey, T.L.
    1982 Afrikaans: Creole or non-creole?Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik49: 169–207.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Maurer, Philippe
    1995L’Angolar, un Créole Afro-Portugais parlé à São Tomé. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. McWhorter, John H.
    1998 Identifying the creole prototype: Vindicating a typological class. Language74(4): 788–818. doi: 10.2307/417003
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417003 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2001 The world's simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic Typology5(2/3): 125–166. With peer commentaries: 167–387.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2005Defining Creole. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. McWhorter, John
    2013 It's not over: Why it matters whether there is such thing as a creole. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages28(2): 409–423. doi: 10.1075/jpcl.28.2.05mcw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.28.2.05mcw [Google Scholar]
  39. Michaelis, Susanne Maria , Philippe Maurer , Martin Haspelmath and Magnus Huber
    eds. 2013The Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Moussay, Gérard
    2006Grammaire de la langue Cam. Paris: Missions Étrangères de Paris, Les Indes Savantes.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Mufwene, Salikoko S.
    2001The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511612862
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612862 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2007 Les créoles: De nouvelles variétés indo-européennes désavouées?In Marie-Paul Ensie , ed.Actes du colloque ʺCréolisation linguistique et Sciences Humaines”. Paris: Presses Universitaires Haïtiano-Antillaises. 59–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Parkvall, Mikael
    2008 The simplicity of creoles in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Matti Miestamo , Kaius Sinnemäki and Fred Karlsson , eds.Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 265–285. doi: 10.1075/slcs.94.17par
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.17par [Google Scholar]
  44. Slobin, Dan I.
    1977 Language change in childhood and in history. In John Macnamara , ed.Language Learning and Thought. Academic Press. 185–214.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sneddon, James N.
    1996Indonesian: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Taylor, Douglas
    1956 Language contact in the West Indies. Word12: 391–414. doi: 10.1080/00437956.1956.11659610
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1956.11659610 [Google Scholar]
  47. Traugott, E.C.
    1977 Pidginization, creolization, and language change. In A. Valdman , ed.Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 70–98.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Troubetzkoy N.S.
    1939Grundzüge der Phonologie. Prague. [Trad. Fr. 1947, Principes de phonologie. Paris: Klincksieck].
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Véronique, Daniel
    2009 Review of John Holm and Peter L. Patrick , eds.Comparative Creole Syntax: Parallel Outlines of 18 Creole Grammars. Journal of Language Contact – VARIA2: 153–157.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/le.1.1.04fon
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/le.1.1.04fon
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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