Pidgin and Creole Languages
Originally thought of as incomplete, broken, corrupt, not worthy
of serious attention. Pidgins still are marginal: in origin
(makeshift, reduced in structure), in attitudes toward them (low
prestige); in our knowledge of them.
Some quick definitions:
Pidgin language (origin in Engl. word `business'?) is nobody's
native language; may arise when two speakers of different languages
with no common language try to have a makeshift conversation.
Lexicon usually comes from one language, structure often from the
other. Because of colonialism, slavery etc. the prestige of Pidgin
languages is very low. Many pidgins are `contact vernaculars', may
only exist for one speech event.Creole (orig. person of European
descent born and raised in a tropical colony) is a language that
was originally a pidgin but has become nativized, i.e. a community
of speakers claims it as their first language. Next used to
designate the language(s) of people of Caribbean and African
descent in colonial and ex-colonial countries (Jamaica, Haiti,
Mauritius, Runion, Hawaii, Pitcairn, etc.)Relexification The
process of substituting new vocabulary for old. Pidgins may get
relexified with new English vocabulary to replace the previous
Portuguese vocabulary, etc.
PidginFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNot to be confused
with the Pigeon bird. For the instant messaging client, see Pidgin
(software).A pidgin /pdn/, or pidgin language, is a simplified
version of a language that develops as a means of communication
between two or more groups that do not have a language in common.
It is most commonly employed in situations such as trade, or where
both groups speak languages different from the language of the
country in which they reside (but where there is no common language
between the groups). Fundamentally, a pidgin is a simplified means
of linguistic communication, as it is constructed impromptu, or by
convention, between individuals or groups of people. A pidgin is
not the native language of any speech community, but is instead
learned as a second language.[1][2] A pidgin may be built from
words, sounds, or body language from multiple other languages and
cultures. They allow people who have no common language to
communicate with each other. Pidgins usually have low prestige with
respect to other languages.[3]
Not all simplified or "broken" forms of a language are pidgins.
Each pidgin has its own norms of usage which must be learned for
proficiency in the pidgin.[4]Etymology[edit]The origin of the word
is uncertain. Pidgin first appeared in print in 1850. The most
widely accepted etymology is from the Chinese pronunciation of the
English word business.[5]
Another etymology that has been proposed is English pigeon, a
bird sometimes used for carrying brief written messages, especially
in times prior to modern telecommunications.[6]
Terminology[edit]The word pidgin, formerly also spelled
pigion,[5] used to refer originally to Chinese Pidgin English, but
was later generalized to refer to any pidgin.[7] Pidgin may also be
used as the specific name for local pidgins or creoles, in places
where they are spoken. For example, the name of the creole language
Tok Pisin derives from the English words talk pidgin. Its speakers
usually refer to it simply as "pidgin" when speaking English.[8][9]
Likewise, Hawaiian Creole English is commonly referred to by its
speakers as "Pidgin".
The term jargon has also been used to refer to pidgins, and is
found in the names of some pidgins, such as Chinook Jargon. In this
context, linguists today use jargon to denote a particularly
rudimentary type of pidgin;[10] however, this usage is rather rare,
and the term jargon most often refers to the words particular to a
given profession.
Pidgins may start out as or become trade languages, such as Tok
Pisin. Trade languages are often fully developed languages in their
own right such as Swahili. Trade languages tend to be "vehicular
languages", while pidgins can evolve into the
vernacular.[clarification needed]
Common traits among pidgin languages[edit]Since a pidgin
language is a fundamentally simpler form of communication, the
grammar and phonology are usually as simple as possible, and
usually consist of:[citation needed]
Uncomplicated clausal structure (e.g., no embedded clauses,
etc.)Reduction or elimination of syllable codasReduction of
consonant clusters or breaking them with epenthesisBasic vowels,
such as [a, e, i, o, u]No tones, such as those found in West
African and Asian languagesUse of separate words to indicate tense,
usually preceding the verbUse of reduplication to represent
plurals, superlatives, and other parts of speech that represent the
concept being increasedA lack of morphophonemic variationPidgin
development[edit]The initial development of a pidgin usually
requires:
prolonged, regular contact between the different language
communitiesa need to communicate between theman absence of (or
absence of widespread proficiency in) a widespread, accessible
interlanguageKeith Whinnom (in Hymes (1971)) suggests that pidgins
need three languages to form, with one (the superstrate) being
clearly dominant over the others.
Linguists sometimes posit that pidgins can become creole
languages when a generation of children learn a pidgin as their
first language,[11] a process that regularizes speaker-dependent
variation in grammar. Creoles can then replace the existing mix of
languages to become the native language of a community (such as the
Chavacano language in the Philippines, Krio in Sierra Leone, and
Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea). However, not all pidgins become
creole languages; a pidgin may die out before this phase would
occur (e.g. the Mediterranean Lingua Franca).
Other scholars, such as Salikoko Mufwene, argue that pidgins and
creoles arise independently under different circumstances, and that
a pidgin need not always precede a creole nor a creole evolve from
a pidgin. Pidgins, according to Mufwene, emerged among trade
colonies among "users who preserved their native vernaculars for
their day-to-day interactions". Creoles, meanwhile, developed in
settlement colonies in which speakers of a European language, often
indentured servants whose language would be far from the standard
in the first place, interacted extensively with non-European
slaves, absorbing certain words and features from the slaves'
non-European native languages, resulting in a heavily
basilectalized version of the original language. These servants and
slaves would come to use the creole as an everyday vernacular,
rather than merely in situations in which contact with a speaker of
the superstrate was necessary.[12]
List of pidgins[edit]The following pidgins have Wikipedia
articles or sections in articles. They are only a fraction of the
pidgins of the world.
List of English-based pidginsAlgonquianBasque
pidginArafundi-Enga PidginBarikanchi PidginBasqueIcelandic
pidginBimbashi ArabicBroken Slavey and Loucheux JargonCamthoPidgin
Delaware
Theories
A pidgin is a restricted language which arises for the purposes
of communication between two social groups of which one is in a
more dominant position than the other. The less dominant group is
the one which develops the pidgin. Historically, pidgins arose in
colonial situations where the representatives of the particular
colonial power, officials, tradesmen, sailors, etc., came in
contact with natives. The latter developed a jargon when
communicating with the former. This resulted in a language on the
basis of the colonial language in question and the language or
languages of the natives. Such a language was restricted in its
range as it served a definite purpose, namely basic communication
with the colonists. In the course of several generations such a
reduced form of language can become more complex, especially if it
develops into the mother tongue of a group of speakers. This latter
stage is that of creolisation. Creoles are much expanded versions
of pidgins and have arisen in situations in which there was a break
in the natural linguistic continuity of a community, for instance
on slave planatations in their early years.
The interest of linguists in these languages has increased
greatly in the last few decades. The main reason for this is that
pidgins and creoles are young languages. In retracing their
development it may be possible to see how new languages can arise.
Furthermore, the large number of shared features among widely
dispersed pidgins and creoles leads to the conclusion that creoles
at least show characteristics which are typical of language in the
most general sense, the features of older languages, such as
complex morphology or intricate phonology, arising due to the
action of various forces over a long period of time after the birth
of these languages. In type, creoles are all analytic and generally
lack complexity in their sound systems.
The terms pidgin and creole
There are a number of views on the origin of the term pidgin,
none of which has gained sole acceptance by the academic
community.
1)Chinese corruption of the word business. As the word is used
for any action or occupation (cf. joss-pidgin religion and
chow-chow-pidgin cooking') it should not be surprising that it be
used for a language variety which arose for trading purposes.
2)Portuguese ocupaao meaning trade, job, occupation. This
suggestion is interesting as the Portuguese were among the first
traders to travel to the third world and influence natives with
their language. Phonetically the shift from the original word to a
form /pidgin/ is difficult to explain.
3)A form from the South American language Yayo -pidian meaning
people (claim put forward by Kleinecke, 1959). This form occurs in
tribal names like Mapidian, Tarapidian, etc. This claim rests on a
single occurrence of the word Pidians in a text from 1606. But as
several authors have pointed out this might be a spelling error for
Indians seeing as how the author has other misspellings in the text
in question.
4)Hancock (1972) suggested that the term is derived from pequeno
portugues which is used in Angola for the broken Portuguese spoken
by the illiterate. This view is semantically justified seeing that
the word pequeno is often used to mean offspring, in this case a
language derived from another. Phonetically, the shift to /pidgin/
is not difficult to account for: /peke:no/ > /pege:n/ >
/pigin/ > /pidgin/ (stages not attested, however).
5)Hebrew word pidjom meaning barter. This suggestion is
phonetically and semantically plausible, hinges however on the
distribution of a Jewish word outside of Europe and its acceptance
as a general term for a trade language.
The term creole There is less controversy on this issue than on
the previous one. The term would seem to derive from French creole,
it in its turn coming from Portuguese crioulo (rather than from
Spanish criollo') which goes back to an Iberian stem meaning to
nurse, breed, bring up. The present meaning is native to a locality
or country. Originally it was used (17th century) to refer to those
from European countries born in the colonies. The term then
underwent a semantic shift to refer to customs and language of
those in the colonies and later to any language derived from a
pidgin based on a European language, typically English, French,
Portuguese, Spanish or Dutch. Now the term refers to any language
of this type, irrespective of what the input language has been.
Theories of origin
There are various theories about the origin of pidgins which
have been proposed in the last hundred years or so. These can be
presented as a basic group of five theories which show a degree of
overlap; note that a mixture of origins is also a possibility which
should also be considered.
1) The baby-talk theory At the end of the last century Charles
Leland, when discussing China coast pidgin English, noted that
there were many similarities with the speech of children such as
the following features:
a)High percentage of content words with a correspondingly low
number of function words b)Little morphological marking c)Word
classes more flexible than in adult language (free conversion)
d)Contrasts in area of pronouns greatly reduced e)Number of
inflections minimised
Later linguists, notably Jespersen and Bloomfield, maintained
that the characteristics of pidgins result from imperfect mastery
of a language which in its initial stage, in the child with its
first language and in the grown-up with a second language learnt by
imperfect methods, leads to a superficial knowledge of the most
indispensable word, with total disregard of grammar (Jespersen
1922: 234). The evaluative nature of such views would be rejected
by linguists today.
2) Independent parallel development theory This view maintains
that the obvious similarities between the worlds pidgins and
creoles arose on independent but parallel lines due to the fact
that they all are derived from languages of Indo-European stock
and, in the case of the Atlantic varieties, due to their sharing a
common West African substratum. Furthermore, scholars like Robert
Hall specify that the similar social and physical conditions under
which pidgins arose were responsible for the development of similar
linguistic structures.
3) Nautical jargon theory As early as 1938 the American linguist
John Reinecke noted the possible influence of nautical jargon on
pidgins. It is obvious that on many of the original voyages of
discovery to the developing world many nationalities were
represented among the crews of the ships. This fact led to the
development of a core vocabulary of nautical items and a simplified
grammar (at least as regards English). Later pidgins show many of
these lexical items irrespective of where the language varieties
are spoken. Thus the word capsise turns up with the meaning turn
over or spill in both West Atlantic and Pacific pidgins. So do the
words heave, hoist, hail, galley, cargo. One of the shortcomings of
this otherwise attractive theory is that it does not help to
account for the many structural affinities between pidgins which
arose from different European languages.
4) Monogenetic/relexification theory According to this view all
pidgins can be traced back to a single proto-pidgin, a 15th century
Portuguese pidgin which was itself probably a relic of the medieval
lingua franca (also known as sabir from the Portuguese word for
know') which was the common means of communication among the
Crusaders and traders in the Mediterranean area. Lingua franca
survived longest on the North African coast and is attested from
Algeria and Tunesia as late as the 19th century. The theory
maintains that when the Portuguese first sailed down the west coast
of Africa in the 15th century they would have used their form of
lingua franca (sabir). Afterwards in the 16th and 17th centuries
when the Portuguese influence in Africa declined, the vocabulary of
the then established pidgins would have been replaced by that of
the new colonial language which was dominant in the area, say
English or French. As the Portuguese were among the first traders
in India and South East Asia a similar situation can be assumed to
have obtained: the vocabulary of the original Portuguese pidgin was
replaced by that of a later European language. Note that with this
theory the grammatical structure of pidgins would not have been
effected by the switch in vocabulary (this is what is meant by the
term relexification). Thus the obvious similarity in structure of
all pidgins would go back to the grammar of the proto-pidgin coming
from the Mediterranean area. What this theory does not explain is
why the structure (analytic) should be of the type it is.
Furthermore there are a number of marginal pidgins (Russenorsk,
Eskimo Trade Jargon) which cannot conceivably be connected with
Portuguese and which are nonetheless analytic in structure just as
the pidgins based on the main European colonial languages are.
5) Universalist theory This is the most recent view on the
origin of pidgins and has elements in common with the other
theories. However, the distinguishing mark of this theory is that
it sees the similarities as due to universal tendencies among
humans to create languages of a similar type, i.e. an analytic
language with a simple phonology, an SVO syntax with little or no
subordination or other sentence complexities, and with a lexicon
which makes maximum use of polysemy (and devices such as
reduplication) operating from a limited core vocabulary. To put it
in technical terms, a creole will be expected to have unmarked
values for linguistic parameters, e.g. with the parameter pro-drop,
whereby the personal pronoun is not obligatory with verb forms (cf.
Italian capisco I understand'), the unmarked setting is for no
pro-drop to be allowed and indeed this is the situation in all
pidgins and creoles, a positive value being something which may
appear later with the rise of a rich morphology.
Developmental stages of pidgins/creoles
Social situationLinguistic correlate1)Marginal contactRestricted
pidgin2)NativisationExtended pidgin3)Mother tongue
developmentCreole4)Movement towards standard language (not
necessarily input language)Decreolisation
Pidgins are generally characterised as restricted and extended.
In the life-cycle of pidgins one can note that they start off as
restricted language varieties used in marginal contact situations
for minimal trading purposes. From this original modest outset a
pidgin may, assuming that there are social reasons for it to do so,
develop into an extended type. The latter is characterised by the
extension of the social functions of a pidgin. One very frequent
scenario in the later development of a pidgin is where it is used
as a means of communication not just among black and white speakers
but among native speakers themselves who however have very
different native languages. This is the major reason for the
survival of pidgin English in West Africa. The function of pidgin
English is thus as a lingua franca, i.e. a common means of
communication between speakers who do not understand their
respective native languages.
The process of pidginisation is very common in any situation in
which a lingua franca is called for. Normally any such variety dies
out very quickly once the situation which gave rise to it no longer
obtains. If the situation does continue to exist then the pidgin is
likely to survive. The steps from restricted to extended pidgin and
further to creole are only taken by very few languages,
particularly the major restructuring typical of pidgins is not
normally carried out by any but a very small number of input
varieties.
Reasons for creole development Creoles may arise in one of two
basic situations. One is where speakers of pidgins are put in a
situation in which they cannot use their respective mother tongues.
This has arisen in the course of the slave trade (in the Caribbean
and the southern United States) where speakers were deliberately
kept in separate groups to avoid their plotting rebellion. They
were then forced to maintain the pidgin which they had developed up
to then and pass it on to future generations as their mother tongue
thus forming the transition from a pidgin to a creole. A second
situation is where a pidgin is regarded by a social group as a
higher language variety and deliberately cultivated; this is the
kind of situation which obtained in Cameroon and which does still
to some extent on Papua New Guinea. The outcome of this kind of
situation is that the children of such speakers which use pidgin
for prestige reasons may end up using the pidgin as a first
language, thus rendering it a creole with the attendant
relinquishing of the native language of their parents and the
expansion of all linguistic levels for the new creole to act as a
fully-fledged language.
Monogenetic Theories (single-origin theories)Monogenetic
theories assume monogenesis, hence the name. It is argued that
there is a single origin of European-based pidgins and
creoles.Monogenesis and RelexificationMonogenetic approaches
explain the structural similarities between most or all
European-based pidgins (and creoles) with a common origin.According
to monogenetic theories, all pidgins have a common origin, the
proto-pidgin. Thus, pidgins are genetically related and descent
from a common ancestor.A fifteenth century Portuguese-based pidgin
in West Africa (WAPP) has been established as the proto-pidgin. It
functions similar to a late version of the medieval Mediterranean
Lingua Franca called Sabir.According to the theory of monogenesis,
WAPP (West African Pidgin Portuguese) was carried around the world
in the course of European colonization and, as a consequence, gave
rise to pidgins (and later creoles) in many places. These pidgins
and creoles all retained particular structural features including
lexical remnants of the Portuguese-based proto-pidgin.An important
component of the monogenesis theory is relexification.
Relexification explains the lexical differences between pidgins and
creoles, as they are historically related and derive from a common
origin in WAPP.The term 'relexification' means the total or
near-total replacement of the vocabulary of a particular language
by vocabulary from another language.Thus, if relexification is
assumed, when WAPP was carried around the world and its speakers
came into contact with different groups of European colonizers
English, Spanish, Dutch and French - it was adopted by these
colonizers by a process of relexification. Thus, WAPP was
relexified and influenced by the particular European colonizers
language with which it was in contact. It gave rise to different
European-based pidgins and creoles over time.While the lexicon
changed and Portuguese words were replaced by words from other
European colonizers' languages, the basic grammatical structure of
WAPP was retained. According to the monogenesis theory, this is the
reason for the structural similarities between pidgins and creoles
which have different lexifier languages.Disadvantage of the
monogenesis theory:The theory of monogenesis does not consider the
development of all pidgins and creoles worldwide. It only focuses
on European-based pidgins and creoles that originated from
WAPP.However, there are pidgins and creoles which developed without
European connections (e.g. several African or Asian pidgins). These
contact languages also show basic structural
similarities.Consequently, although monogenesis assumes
relexification, and although this may be an appropriate explanation
for all European-based pidgins and creoles, it cannot account for
the structural similarities between pidgins and creoles worldwide.A
more general theory of genesis, thus, should cover all cases of
pidginization. Such a theory then must be a polygenetic one which
assumes multiple independent origins for the contact languages of
the world.
Creole languageFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNot to be
confused with Creole markup language.
Road sign in Guadeloupe Creole meaning Slow down. Children are
playing here. The literal translation is "Lift your foot [from the
accelerator]. There are small people playing here".A creole
language, or simply a creole, is a stable natural language that has
developed from a pidgin, i.e. a simplified version of a language.
Creoles differ from pidgins because creoles have been nativized by
children as their primary language, with the result that they have
features of natural languages that are normally missing from
pidgins, which are not anyone's first language.
The precise number of creoles is not known, particularly as
these are poorly attested, but about one hundred creole languages
have arisen since 1500, predominantly based on European languages,
due to the Age of Discovery and the Atlantic slave trade,[1] though
there are creoles based on other languages, including Arabic,
Chinese, and Malay. The creole with the largest number of speakers
is Haitian Creole, with about ten million native speakers.
The lexicon of a creole language is largely supplied by the
parent languages, particularly that of the most dominant group in
the social context of the creole's construction, though there are
often clear phonetic and semantic shifts. On the other hand, the
grammar often has original features that may differ substantially
from those of the parent languages.
Overview[edit]A creole is believed to arise when a pidgin,
developed by adults for use as a second language, becomes the
native and primary language of their children a process known as
nativization.[2] The pidgin-creole life cycle was studied by Hall
in the 1960s.[3]
Creoles share more grammatical similarities with each other than
with the languages from which they are phylogenetically derived.[4]
However, there is no widely accepted theory that would account for
those perceived similarities.[5] Moreover, no grammatical feature
has been shown to be specific to creoles,[6][7][8][9][10][11]
although it is generally acknowledged that creoles have simpler and
less sophisticated grammar than longer-established languages
Many of the creoles known today arose in the last 500 years, as
a result of the worldwide expansion in European maritime power and
trade in the Age of Discovery, which led to extensive European
colonial empires and an intense slave trade. Like most non-official
and minority languages, creoles have generally been regarded as
degenerate variants or dialects of their parent languages. Because
of that prejudice, many of the creoles that arose in the European
colonies have become extinct. However, political and academic
changes in recent decades have improved the status of creoles, both
as living languages and as object of linguistic study.[12][13] Some
creoles have even been granted the status of official or
semi-official language.
Linguists now recognize that creole formation is a universal
phenomenon, not limited to the European colonial period, and an
important aspect of language evolution (see Vennemann (2003)). For
example, in 1933 Sigmund Feist postulated a creole origin for the
Germanic languages.
Other scholars, such as Salikoko Mufwene, argue that pidgins and
creoles arise independently under different circumstances, and that
a pidgin need not always precede a creole nor a creole evolve from
a pidgin. Pidgins, according to Mufwene, emerged among trade
colonies among "users who preserved their native vernaculars for
their day-to-day interactions." Creoles, meanwhile, developed in
settlement colonies in which speakers of a European language, often
indentured servants whose language would be far from the standard
in the first place, interacted extensively with non-European
slaves, absorbing certain words and features from the slaves'
non-European native languages, resulting in a heavily
basilectalized version of the original language. These servants and
slaves would come to use the creole as an everyday vernacular,
rather than merely in situations in which contact with a speaker of
the superstrate was necessary.[14]
History[edit]Origin[edit]The English term creole comes from
French crole, which is cognate with the Spanish term criollo and
Portuguese crioulo, all descending from the verb criar ('to breed'
or 'to raise'), all coming from Latin creare ('to produce,
create').[15] The specific sense of the term was coined in the 16th
and 17th century, during the great expansion in European maritime
power and trade that led to the establishment of European colonies
in other continents.
The terms criollo and crioulo were originally qualifiers used
throughout the Spanish and Portuguese colonies to distinguish the
members of an ethnic group who were born and raised locally from
those who immigrated as adults. They were most commonly applied to
nationals of the colonial power, e.g. to distinguish espaoles
criollos (people born in the colonies from Spanish ancestors) from
espaoles peninsulares (those born in the Iberian Peninsula, i.e.
Spain). However in Brazil the term was also used to distinguish
between negros crioulos (blacks born in Brazil from African slave
ancestors) and negros africanos (born in Africa). Over time, the
term and its derivatives (Creole, Krol, Kreyol, Kriol, Krio, etc.)
lost the generic meaning and became the proper name of many
distinct ethnic groups that developed locally from immigrant
communities. Originally, therefore, the term "creole language"
meant the speech of any of those creole peoples.
Geographic distribution[edit]As a consequence of colonial
European trade patterns, most of the known European-based creole
languages arose in coastal areas in the equatorial belt around the
world, including the Americas, western Africa, Goa along the west
of India, and along Southeast Asia up to Indonesia, Singapore,
Macau, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Malaysia, Seychelles and
Oceania.[according to whom?]
Many of those creoles are now extinct, but others still survive
in the Caribbean, the north and east coasts of South America (The
Guyanas), western Africa, Australia (see Australian Kriol
language), and in the Indian Ocean.
Atlantic Creole languages are based on European languages with
elements from African and possibly Amerindian languages. Indian
Ocean Creole languages are based on European languages with
elements from Malagasy and possibly other Asian languages. There
are, however, creoles like Nubi and Sango that are derived solely
from non-European languages.
Social and political status[edit]Because of the generally low
status of the Creole peoples in the eyes of prior European colonial
powers, creole languages have generally been regarded as
"degenerate" languages, or at best as rudimentary "dialects" of the
politically dominant parent languages. Because of this prejudice,
the word "creole" was generally used by linguists in opposition to
"language", rather than as a qualifier for it.[16] This prejudice
was compounded by the inherent instability of the colonial system,
leading to the disappearance of creole languages, mainly due to
dispersion or assimilation of their speech communities.[16]
Another factor that may have contributed to the relative neglect
of creole languages in linguistics is that they do not fit the
19th-century neogrammarian "tree model" for the evolution of
languages, and its postulated regularity of sound changes (these
critics including the earliest advocates of the wave model,
Johannes Schmidt and Hugo Schuchardt, the forerunners of modern
sociolinguistics). This controversy of the late 19th century
profoundly shaped modern approaches to the comparative method in
historical linguistics and in creolistics.[12][16][17]
Creole in use at car rental counter, USABecause of social,
political, and academic changes brought on by decolonization in the
second half of the 20th century, creole languages have experienced
revivals in the past few decades. They are increasingly being used
in print and film, and in many cases, their community prestige has
improved dramatically. In fact, some have been standardized, and
are used in local schools and universities around the
world.[12][13][18] At the same time, linguists have begun to come
to the realization that creole languages are in no way inferior to
other languages. They now use the term "creole" or "creole
language" for any language suspected to have undergone
creolization, terms that now imply no geographic restrictions nor
ethnic prejudices.
Classification of creoles[edit]Historic
classification[edit]According to their external history, four types
of creoles have been distinguished: plantation creoles, fort
creoles, maroon creoles, and creolized pidgins.[19] By the very
nature of a creole language, the phylogenetic classification of a
particular creole usually is a matter of dispute; especially when
the pidgin precursor and its parent tongues (which may have been
other creoles or pidgins) have disappeared before they could be
documented.
Phylogenetic classification traditionally relies on inheritance
of the lexicon, especially of "core" terms, and of the grammar
structure. However, in creoles, the core lexicon often has mixed
origin, and the grammar is largely original. For these reasons, the
issue of which language is the parent of a creole that is, whether
a language should be classified as a "Portuguese creole" or
"English creole", etc. often has no definitive answer, and can
become the topic of long-lasting controversies, where social
prejudices and political considerations may interfere with
scientific discussion.[12][13][20]
Substrate and superstrate[edit]The terms substrate and
superstrate are often used when two languages interact. However,
the meaning of these terms is reasonably well-defined only in
second language acquisition or language replacement events, when
the native speakers of a certain source language (the substrate)
are somehow compelled to abandon it for another target language
(the superstrate).[21] The outcome of such an event is that
erstwhile speakers of the substrate will use some version of the
superstrate, at least in more formal contexts. The substrate may
survive as a second language for informal conversation. As
demonstrated by the fate of many replaced European languages (such
as Etruscan, Breton, and Venetian), the influence of the substrate
on the official speech is often limited to pronunciation and a
modest number of loanwords. The substrate might even disappear
altogether without leaving any trace.[21]
However, there is dispute over the extent to which the terms
"substrate" and "superstrate" are applicable to the genesis or the
description of creole languages.[22] The language replacement model
may not be appropriate in creole formation contexts, where the
emerging language is derived from multiple languages without any
one of them being imposed as a replacement for any other.[23][24]
The substratum-superstratum distinction becomes awkward when
multiple superstrata must be assumed (such as in Papiamentu), when
the substratum cannot be identified, or when the presence or the
survival of substratal evidence is inferred from mere typological
analogies.[9] On the other hand, the distinction may be meaningful
when the contributions of each parent language to the resulting
creole can be shown to be very unequal, in a scientifically
meaningful way.[25] In the literature on Atlantic Creoles,
"superstrate" usually means European and "substrate" non-European
or African.[26]
Decreolization[edit]Since creole languages rarely attain
official status, the speakers of a fully formed creole may
eventually feel compelled to conform their speech to one of the
parent languages. This decreolization process typically brings
about a post-creole speech continuum characterized by large scale
variation and hypercorrection in the language.[12]
It is generally acknowledged that creoles have a simpler grammar
and more internal variability than older, more established
languages.[27] However, these notions are occasionally
challenged.[28] (See also language complexity.)
Phylogenetic or typological comparisons of creole languages have
led to divergent conclusions. Similarities are usually higher among
creoles derived from related languages, such as the languages of
Europe, than among broader groups that include also creoles based
on non-Indo-European languages (like Nubi or Sango). French-based
creoles in turn are more similar to each other (and to varieties of
French) than to other European-based creoles. It was observed, in
particular, that definite articles are mostly prenominal in
English-based creole languages and English whereas they are
generally postnominal in French creoles and in the variety of
French that was exported to the colonies in the 17th and 18th
century.[29] Moreover the European languages which gave rise to the
creole languages of European colonies all belong to the same
subgroup of Western Indo-European and have highly convergent
grammars; to the point that Whorf joined them into a single
Standard Average European language group.[30] French and English
are particularly close, since English, through extensive borrowing,
is typologically closer to French than to other Germanic
languages.[31] Thus the claimed similarities between creoles may be
mere consequences of similar parentage, rather than characteristic
features of all creoles.
Creole genesis[edit]There are a variety of theories on the
origin of creole languages, all of which attempt to explain the
similarities among them. Arends, Muysken & Smith (1995) outline
a fourfold classification of explanations regarding creole
genesis:
Theories focusing on European inputTheories focusing on
non-European inputGradualist and developmental
hypothesesUniversalist approachesTheories focusing on European
input[edit]Monogenetic theory of pidgins and creoles[edit]The
monogenetic theory of pidgins and creoles hypothesizes that they
are all derived from a single Mediterranean Lingua Franca, via a
West African Pidgin Portuguese of the 17th century, relexified in
the so-called "slave factories" of Western Africa that were the
source of the Atlantic slave trade. This theory was originally
formulated by Hugo Schuchardt in the late 19th century and
popularized in the late 1950s and early 1960s by Taylor,[32]
Whinnom,[33] Thompson,[34] and Stewart.[35] However, this
hypothesis is no longer actively investigated.
Domestic origin hypothesis[edit]Proposed by Hancock (1985) for
the origin of English-based creoles of the West Indies, the
Domestic Origin Hypothesis argues that, towards the end of the 16th
century, English-speaking traders began to settle in the Gambia and
Sierra Leone rivers as well as in neighboring areas such as the
Bullom and Sherbro coasts. These settlers intermarried with the
local population leading to mixed populations, and, as a result of
this intermarriage, an English pidgin was created. This pidgin was
learned by slaves in slave depots, who later on took it to the West
Indies and formed one component of the emerging English
creoles.
European dialect origin hypothesis[edit]The French creoles are
the foremost candidates to being the outcome of "normal" linguistic
change and their creoleness to be sociohistoric in nature and
relative to their colonial origin.[36] Within this theoretical
framework, a French creole is a language phylogenetically based on
the French language, more specifically on a 17th-century koin
French extant in Paris, the French Atlantic harbours, and the
nascent French colonies. Supporters of this hypothesis suggest that
the non-Creole French dialects still spoken in many parts of the
Americas share mutual descent from this single koin. These dialects
are found in Canada (mostly in Qubec and among the Acadian people
of the Eastern Maritime provinces), the Prairies, Louisiana,
Saint-Barthlemy (leeward portion of the island) and as isolates in
other parts of the Americas.[37] Approaches under this hypothesis
are compatible with gradualism in change and models of imperfect
language transmission in koin genesis.
Foreigner talk and baby talk[edit]The Foreigner Talk (FT)
hypothesis argues that a pidgin or creole language forms when
native speakers attempt to simplify their language in order to
address speakers who do not know their language at all. Because of
the similarities found in this type of speech and speech directed
to a small child, it is also sometimes called baby talk.[38]
Arends, Muysken & Smith (1995) suggest that four different
processes are involved in creating Foreigner Talk:
AccommodationImitationTelegraphic condensationConventionsThis
could explain why creole languages have much in common, while
avoiding a monogenetic model. However, Hinnenkamp (1984), in
analyzing German Foreigner Talk, claims that it is too inconsistent
and unpredictable to provide any model for language learning.
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion
may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message
until the dispute is resolved. (November 2013)While the
simplification of input was supposed to account for creoles' simple
grammar, commentators have raised a number of criticisms of this
explanation:[39]
There are a great many grammatical similarities amongst pidgins
and creoles despite having very different lexifier
languages.Grammatical simplification can be explained by other
processes, i.e. the innate grammar of Bickerton's language
bioprogram theory.Speakers of a creole's lexifier language often
fail to understand, without learning the language, the grammar of a
pidgin or creole.Pidgins are more often used amongst speakers of
different substrate languages than between such speakers and those
of the lexifier language.Another problem with the FT explanation is
its potential circularity. Bloomfield (1933) points out that FT is
often based on the imitation of the incorrect speech of the
non-natives, that is the pidgin. Therefore one may be mistaken in
assuming that the former gave rise to the latter.
Imperfect L2 learning[edit]The imperfect L2 (second language)
learning hypothesis claims that pidgins are primarily the result of
the imperfect L2 learning of the dominant lexifier language by the
slaves. Research on naturalistic L2 processes has revealed a number
of features of "interlanguage systems" that are also seen in
pidgins and creoles:
invariant verb forms derived from the infinitive or the least
marked finite verb form;loss of determiners or use as determiners
of demonstrative pronouns, adjectives or adverbs;placement of a
negative particle in preverbal position;use of adverbs to express
modality;fixed single word order with no inversion in
questions;reduced or absent nominal plural marking.Imperfect L2
learning is compatible with other approaches, notably the European
dialect origin hypothesis and the universalist models of language
transmission.[40]
Theories focusing on non-European input[edit]Theories focusing
on the substrate, or non-European, languages attribute similarities
amongst creoles to the similarities of African substrate languages.
These features are often assumed to be transferred from the
substrate language to the creole or to be preserved invariant from
the substrate language in the creole through a process of
relexification: the substrate language replaces the native lexical
items with lexical material from the superstrate language while
retaining the native grammatical categories.[41] The problem with
this explanation is that the postulated substrate languages differ
amongst themselves and with creoles in meaningful ways. Bickerton
(1981) argues that the number and diversity of African languages
and the paucity of a historical record on creole genesis makes
determining lexical correspondences a matter of chance. Dillard
(1970) coined the term "cafeteria principle" to refer to the
practice of arbitrarily attributing features of creoles to the
influence of substrate African languages or assorted substandard
dialects of European languages.
For a representative debate on this issue, see the contributions
to Mufwene (1993); for a more recent view, Parkvall (2000).
Because of the sociohistoric similarities amongst many (but by
no means all) of the creoles, the Atlantic slave trade and the
plantation system of the European colonies have been emphasized as
factors by linguists such as McWhorter (1999).
Gradualist and developmental hypotheses[edit]One class of
creoles might start as pidgins, rudimentary second languages
improvised for use between speakers of two or more non-intelligible
native languages. Keith Whinnom (in Hymes (1971)) suggests that
pidgins need three languages to form, with one (the superstrate)
being clearly dominant over the others. The lexicon of a pidgin is
usually small and drawn from the vocabularies of its speakers, in
varying proportions. Morphological details like word inflections,
which usually take years to learn, are omitted; the syntax is kept
very simple, usually based on strict word order. In this initial
stage, all aspects of the speech syntax, lexicon, and pronunciation
tend to be quite variable, especially with regard to the speaker's
background.
If a pidgin manages to be learned by the children of a community
as a native language, it may become fixed and acquire a more
complex grammar, with fixed phonology, syntax, morphology, and
syntactic embedding. Pidgins can become full languages in only a
single generation. "Creolization" is this second stage where the
pidgin language develops into a fully developed native language.
The vocabulary, too, will develop to contain more and more items
according to a rationale of lexical enrichment.[42]
Universalist approaches[edit]Universalist models stress the
intervention of specific general processes during the transmission
of language from generation to generation and from speaker to
speaker. The process invoked varies: a general tendency towards
semantic transparency, first language learning driven by universal
process, or general process of discourse organization. The main
universalist theory is still Bickerton's language bioprogram
theory, proposed in the 1980s.[43] Bickerton claims that creoles
are inventions of the children growing up on newly founded
plantations. Around them, they only heard pidgins spoken, without
enough structure to function as natural languages; and the children
used their own innate linguistic capacities to transform the pidgin
input into a full-fledged language. The alleged common features of
all creoles would then be the consequence of those innate abilities
being universal.
Recent study[edit]The last decade has seen the emergence of some
new questions about the nature of creoles: in particular, the
question of how complex creoles are and the question of whether
creoles are indeed "exceptional" languages.
Creole prototype[edit]Some features that distinguish creole
languages from noncreoles have been proposed (by Bickerton,[44] for
example).
John McWhorter[45] has proposed the following list of features
to indicate a creole prototype:
a lack of inflectional morphology (other than at most two or
three inflectional affixes),a lack of tone on monosyllabic words,
anda lack of semantically opaque word formation.McWhorter
hypothesizes that these three properties exactly characterize a
creole. However, the creole prototype hypothesis has been
disputed:
Henri Wittmann (1999) and David Gil (2001) argue that languages
such as Manding, Soninke, Magoua French and Riau Indonesian have
all these three features but show none of the sociohistoric traits
of creole languages.Others (see overview in Muysken & Law
(2001)) have demonstrated creoles that serve as counterexamples to
McWhorter's hypothesis the existence of inflectional morphology in
Berbice Dutch Creole, for example, or tone in
Papiamentu.[46]Exceptionalism[edit]Building up on this discussion,
McWhorter proposed that "the world's simplest grammars are Creole
grammars", claiming that every noncreole language's grammar is at
least as complex as any creole language's grammar.[47][48] Gil has
replied that Riau Indonesian has a simpler grammar than Saramaccan,
the language McWhorter uses as a showcase for his theory.[8] The
same objections were raised by Wittmann in his 1999 debate with
McWhorter.[49]
The lack of progress made in defining creoles in terms of their
morphology and syntax has led scholars such as Robert Chaudenson,
Salikoko Mufwene, Michel DeGraff, and Henri Wittmann to question
the value of creole as a typological class; they argue that creoles
are structurally no different from any other language, and that
creole is a sociohistoric concept not a linguistic one encompassing
displaced populations and slavery.[50]
Thomason & Kaufman (1988) spell out the idea of creole
exceptionalism, claiming that creole languages are an instance of
nongenetic language change due to language shift with abnormal
transmission. Gradualists[who?] question the abnormal transmission
of languages in a creole setting and argue that the processes which
created today's creole languages are no different from universal
patterns of language change.
Given these objections to creole as a concept, articles such as
"Against Creole Exceptionalism"[51] by DeGraff and texts like
"Deconstructing Creole"[52] by Ansaldo and Matthews have arisen
which question the idea that creoles are exceptional in any
meaningful way. Additionally, Mufwene (2002) argues that some
Romance languages are potential creoles but that they are not
considered as such by linguists because of a historical bias
against such a view.
Lingua francangua franca,( Italian: Frankish language)language
used as a means of communication between populations speaking
vernaculars that are not mutually intelligible. The term was first
used during the Middle Ages to describe a French- and Italian-based
jargon, or pidgin, that was developed by Crusaders and traders in
the eastern Mediterranean and characterized by the invariant forms
of its nouns, verbs, and adjectives. These changes have been
interpreted as simplifications of the Romance languages.
Because they bring together very diverse groups of people, many
empires and major trade entrepts have had lingua francas. If
pidgins have sometimes been defined, less informatively, as lingua
francas, it is because they evolved from varieties that had served
as trade languages. Aramaic played this role in Southwest Asia from
as early as the 7th century bc to approximately ad 650. Classical
Latin was the dominant lingua franca of European scholars until the
18th century, while a less prestigious variety of Latin served as
that of the Hanseatic League (13th15th centuries), especially in
its bookkeeping.
During the era of European exploration in the 15th18th
centuries, Portuguese served as a diplomatic and trade language in
coastal Africa and in Asian coastal areas from the Indian Ocean to
Japan. In Southeast Asia, meanwhile, Malay was already serving as
an important lingua franca; it had been adopted by Arab and Chinese
traders in the region well before the Europeans arrived. Later both
the Dutch and the British used Malay for communication with the
peoples resident in the region.
Modern lingua francas may or may not be officially designated as
such: the United Nations employs six official languages (Arabic,
Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish); international air
traffic control uses English as a common language; and some
multilingual Asian and African countries have unofficial lingua
francas that facilitate interethnic or interregional communication.
Such languages may be erstwhile pidgins, as with Lingala in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Nigerian and Cameroon
pidgins, or Hiri Motu and Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea; they may
also be non-pidginized varieties such as Swahili in East Africa or
Hausa in West Africa.Characteristics[edit]Lingua franca is a term
defined functionally, independent of the linguistic history or
structure of the language:[4] though pidgins and creoles often
function as lingua francas, many such languages are neither pidgins
nor creoles.
Whereas a vernacular language is used as a native language in a
community, a lingua franca is used beyond the boundaries of its
original community, and is used as a second language for
communication between groups. For example, English is a vernacular
in the United Kingdom, but is used as a vehicular language (i.e., a
lingua franca) in the Philippine Islands and India.
International auxiliary languages such as Esperanto have not had
a great degree of adoption globally, so they cannot be described as
global lingua francas.
Etymology[edit]The term lingua franca originated as the name of
a particular language that was used around the eastern
Mediterranean Sea as the main language of commerce and diplomacy -
from late medieval times and especially during the Renaissance era,
up to the 18th century. At that time, Italian speakers dominated
seaborne commerce in the port cities of the Ottoman Empire and a
simplified version of Italian, including many loan words from
Greek, Old French, Portuguese, Occitan, Spanish, as well as Arabic
and Turkish came to be widely used as the "lingua franca" (in the
generic sense used here) of the region.
In Lingua Franca itself, lingua means a language (as in Italian)
- Franca is related to Phrankoi in Greek and Faranji in Arabic, as
well as the equivalent Italian: in all three cases the literal
sense is "Frankish", but this name was actually applied to all
Western Europeans during the late Byzantine Period.[5][6][7]
The Douglas Harper Etymology Dictionary states that the term
Lingua Franca (as the name of the particular language) was first
recorded in English during the 1670s,[8] although an even earlier
example of the use of Lingua Franca in English is attested from
1632, where it is also referred to as "Bastard Spanish".[9]
As recently as the late 20th century, the use of the generic
term was restricted by some to mean only hybrid languages that are
used as vehicular languages (owing to its original meaning), but
nowadays it refers to any vehicular language.[10]
Examples[edit]Main article: List of lingua francasThe use of
lingua francas may be almost as old as language itself. Certainly
they have existed since antiquity. Latin and Greek were the lingua
francas of the Roman Empire; Akkadian, and then Aramaic, remained
the common languages of a large part of Western Asia through
several earlier empires.[11] Examples of lingua francas remain
numerous, and exist on every continent. The most obvious example as
of the early 21st century is English. There are many other lingua
francas centralized on particular regions, such as French,
Portuguese, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Chinese, and Swahili.
In certain countries the lingua franca is also used as the
national language; e.g., Urdu is the lingua franca of Pakistan, as
well as the national language. Indonesian has the same function in
Indonesia; even though Javanese has more native speakers,
Indonesian is the sole official language and spoken (often as a
second language) throughout the country.
6. BibliographyBlum-Kulka, Shoshanna (1989). "Playing it safe:
The role of conventionality in indirectness". In: Blum-Kulka et al.
(Eds.), 37-70.Bublitz, Wolfram (1986). "Gesprchsthema und
thematische Handlungen im Englischen". In: Burkhardt, Armin und
Krner, Karl-Hermann (Eds.). Pragmantax. Akten des 20.
Linguistischen Kolloquiums Branschweig 1985, 225-234.-------
(1988). Supportive Fellow-Speakers and Cooperative Conversations.
Amsterdam und Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Buttjes, Dieter (1991).
"Interkulturelles Lernen im Englischunterricht". Der
Fremdsprachliche Unterricht 25(1), 2-9.Buttler, Christopher (1985).
Statistics in Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Coulmas, Florian (Ed.)
(1981). Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized
Communication Situations and Pre-patterned Speech. The Hague:
Mouton.Edmondson, Willis and House, Juliane (1981). Let's talk and
talk about it. Mnchen, Wien und Baltimore: Urban und
Schwarzenberg.Enninger, Werner. (1987). "What interactants do with
non-talk across cultures". In: Knapp, Karlfried et al. (Eds.).
Analyzing Intercultural Communication. Berlin und New York: Mouton
de Gruyter, 269-301.Firth, Alan (1990). "'Lingua Franca'
Negotiations: Toward an Interactional Approach". World Englishes
9/3, 269-280.Firth, Alan (1996). "The Discoursive Accomplishment of
Normality: On 'Lingua Franca' English and Conversation Analysis".
Journal of Pragmatics 26:2, 237-260.Gtz, Dieter (1977). "Analyse
einer in der Fremdsprache (Englisch) durchgefhrten Konversation".
In: Hunfeld, Hans (Ed.). Neue Perspektiven der
Fremdsprachendidaktik. Kronberg: Scriptor, 71-81.------- (1980).
Englische Gesprche Deutscher Anglistikstudenten: Ausgabe und
Kommentar. Augsburg: Universitt Augsburg.Goodwin, Charles (1989).
"Turn construction and conversational organization". In: Dervin,
Brenda et al. (Eds.). Rethinking Communication. Vol. 2: Paradigm
Exemplars. Newbury Park, California, London and New Delhi: SAGE
Publications, 88-102.Gramkow-Andersen, Karsten (1993). Lingua
Franca Discourse: An Investigation of the Use of English in an
International Business Context. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Aalborg
Universitestcenter.House, Juliane (1982). "Opening and closing
phases in German and English dialogues". Grazer Linguistische
Studien 16, 52-82.Hbler, Axel (1985). Einander Verstehen. Englisch
im Kontext internationaler Kommunikation. Tbingen: Narr.Hllen,
Werner (1982). "Teaching a foreign language as `lingua franca".
Grazer Linguistische Studien 16, 83-88.Hymes, Dell H.(1972). "On
communicative competence". In: Pride, J.B. and Homes, Janes (eds.).
Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 269-293.Kasper, Gabriele
(1981). Pragmatische Aspekte in der Interimsprache. Tbingen: Narr.
Keller, Eric (1979). "Gambits: Conversational strategy signals".
Journal of Pragmatics 3(3/4), 219-238.Knapp, Karlfried (1991).
Linguistische Aspekte interkultureller Kommunikationsfhigkeit.
Unverffentlichte Habilitationsschrift, eingereicht bei der
Philosophischen Fakultt der Heinrich-Heine-Universitt Dsseldorf im
Mai 1991.Koike, Dale April (1989). "Requests and the role of deixis
in politeness". Journal of Pragmatics 13, 187-202.Kultusministerium
des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (Ed.) (1993). Richtlinien und
Lehrplne fr das Gymnasium - Sekundarstufe I - in
Nordrhein-Westfalen. Englisch. Frechen: Ritterbach.Meeuwis, Michael
(1994). "Nonnative-Nonnative Intercultural Communication: An
Analysis of Instruction Sessions for Foreign Engineers in a Belgian
Company". Multilingua 13:1-2, 59-82.Meierkord, Christiane (1996).
Englisch als Medium der interkulturellen Kommunikation.
Untersuchungen zum non-native-/ non-native-speaker-Diskurs.
Frankfurt et al.: Lang.Nelson, Cecil Linwood (1984).
Intelligibility: The Case of Non-Native Varieties of English. Ann
Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International.Orestrm, Bengt
(1983). Turn-Taking in English Conversation. Lund: Liber (CWK
Gleerup).Poel, Kris van de (1991). Modification in Phatic
Endphases: A Study of Cross-Linguistic and Interlanguage Aspects.
Unverffentl. Dissertation. Universitt Edinburgh 1991.Sacks, Harvey
et al. (1974). "A simplest systematics for the organization of
turn-taking for conversation". Language 50/4, 696-735.Schegloff,
Emanuel A. und Sacks, Harvey (1973). "Opening up closings".
Semiotica 8, 289-327.Schneider, Klaus Peter (1987). "Topic
selection in phatic communication". Multilingua 6/3,
247-256.------- (1988). Small Talk: Analysing Phatic Discourse.
Marburg / Lahn: Hitzeroth. (Univ. Diss. Marburg / Lahn).Schwartz,
Joan (1980). "The Negotiation for Meaning: Repair in Conversations
between Second Language Learners of English". In: Larsen-Freeman,
Diane (ed.). Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research,
138-153.Smith, Larry and Nelson, Cecil (1985). "International
Intelligibility of English: Directions and Resources". World
Englishes 4.2, 333-342.Tannen, Deborah and ztek, Piyale Cmert
(1981). "Health to our mouths: Formulaic expressions in Turkish and
Greek". In: Coulmas, Florian (Ed.), 37-54.Varonis, Evangeline M.
and Gass, Susan (1985). "Non-Native / Non-Native Conversations: A
Model for Negotiation of Meaning. Applied Linguistics 6,
71-90.Westheide, Henning (1991). "Dialogstrukturierende
Routineformeln". In: Stati, Sorin et al. (Eds.). Dialoganalyse III.
Referate der 3. Arbeitstagung Bologna 1990. Teil 2. Tbingen:
Niemeyer, 325-337.Yamada, Haru (1990). "Topic management and turn
distribution in business meetings: American versus Japanese
strategies". Text 10(3), 271-295.Zimmermann, Rainer (1984).
Pragmalinguistik und kommunikativer Fremdsprachenunterricht.
Heidelberg: Groos.Notes1 An earlier poster version of this article
was presented at the 11th AILA World Congress of Applied
Linguistics, 1996 in Jyvaskyl, Finland.2 The studies which deal
with lingua franca English so far mainly addressed the question of
mutual intelligibility of different varieties - including learner
language varieties - of English (for example Nelson (1984) and
Smith and Nelson (1985)). Analyses of interaction between
non-native speakers of English are still scarce. Two of these,
Schwartz (1980) and Varonis and Gass (1985) investigated the
negotiation of meaning from a learner language perspective. Studies
focussing on discourse structure include Firth (1990 and 1996),
Gramkow (1993), Meeuwis (1994) and Meierkord (1996). 3 Theoretical
as well as methodological problems associated with the analysis and
interpretation of non-native-/ non-native discourse are dealt with
in Meierkord (1996) and (1998). These topics are not dealt with in
depth here.4 At the present time, however, we know too little about
the processes and conditions involved in international
communication to set a norm for the kind of English that is
adequate for this type of communication and that could be used as a
basis for the identification of learner-language utterances. [my
translation, CM]5 Hymes (1972) assumes that speakers do not only
acquire competence for grammar, but also a competence for use.6 A
speaker is considered to be communicatively competent, if s/he can
form turns, which are (1) grammatically structured, (2) adapted to
the linguistic resources available to her, (3) suitable for the
circumstances relevant to the conversation and (4) commonly used in
the respective situation.7 Schegloff and Sacks (1973) provide a
theory of the structure of closing sequences and Poel (1991)
investigates phatic endphases in interlanguage communication.8
These differ slightly form opening and closing phases, both
regarding their conversational functions and the illocutions found
with them (cf. Meierkord 1996: 52f.).9 The individual illocutions
have been identified according to Edmondson and House (1981), who
define illocutions as the speaker's communicative intent (1981:
48).10 For the subsequent analyses, a turn will be defined as any
utterance of a speaker, which furthers the topic of the
conversation, and which ends either when another speaker takes the
turn or by a long pause. A turn may be interrupted by short pauses
up to two seconds as well as by simultaneous speech by another
speaker, if this does not result in turn-taking. Turn-taking itself
may occur with a pause between turns, with a non-comprehensible
pause or with overlapping turns. In case turns overlap, the
overlapping speech is considered to belong to all individual turns
respectively.11 Coulmas (1981), Blum-Kulka (1989) and Westheide
(1991) provide further evidence on this topic.12 topic change
differs from a topic shift with regard to the content of the
following topic. Whereas in the case of a shift its content is
related to that of the precious topic, there is no relation between
both topics after a change has occurred.13 For a detailed account
of the turn-taking system see Sacks et al. (1974), Orestrm (1983)
and Goodwin (1989).14 The motivation and exact procedure is
stipulated in Meierkord (1996: 108).15 The mode is that value which
has the highest frequency. (Cf. Buttler 1985: 32).16 "The median
value is that value of an arranged set of figures in order from
highest to lowest, that is, in 'rank' order, which has equal
numbers of observations above it and below it." (Buttler 1985:
29-30)17 Cf. e.g. Gtz (1977 and 1980) and Enninger (1987).18
Laughter also plays an important role in repair sequences, i.e.
stretches of talk which occur after the conversation had been
interrupted due to misunderstandings. In these cases, speakers
lacked a certain vocabulary item and had to jointly negotiate its
meaning. During such sequences, the speakers' use of laughter
helped them cope with these potentially face-threatening
situations. A thorough description and interpretation of
negotiation sequences can be found in Meierkord (1996).19 L [the
learner] assumes that N [a native speaker] assumes, that due to a
lack of (receptive) competence in the English language, L does not
(fully) understand what N says; L therefore lets N know by
frequently sending back-channels that she does understand.20 For a
discussion of the notion of safe topic see Schneider (1988: 26). 21
For a description and interpretation of these breakdowns see
Meierkord (1996: 205 ff.).