Sei sulla pagina 1di 7

Ashfaq Aslam

Distinguishes features of Pidgins and Creoles

Over the past century there has been a dramatic increase in the study of language contact and its consequences. Pidgins and Creoles are one of the consequences of language contact. Researchers have expended particular effort in recent years in its study. Traditionally, pidgins and creoles were viewed with contempt, as it was considered a marginal language by most linguists. Hymes points out that pidgins and creoles are marginal, in the circumstances of their origin, and in the attitudes towards them on the part of those who spoke on of the languages from which they derive. They are also marginal in terms of knowledge about them. (Wardhaugh, p.55, 1992). The change in attitud e in recent times, however, led to serious study of Pidgins and Creoles, and thus unearthing many linguistic features which pertain, particularly, to them, as well distinguishing features between them. I will be examining some of the syntactical, morphological and phonology features which pertain to them and distinguishes them from fully fledged languages, as well as those features which differentiate a Pidgin from a Creole.

Pidgins and Creoles emerge from a linguistic need that arises between three or more different language groups, when there arises between them a linguistic need to fulfil some purpose. Such a common language is often termed as Lingua franca, "In 1953, UNESCO defined a lingua franca as 'a language which is used habitually by people whose mother tongues are different in order to facilitate communication between them.' (Wardhaugh, p56, 1992). However, linguists have adopted other terms such as, a trade language, a contact language, a international language and auxiliary language to describe the same phenomenon (Samarin, 1968). Lingua francas are not a rare phenomenon, rather lingua francas are wide spread throughout the world. The most popular lingua franca in recent age is English; however, there are some other lingua francas which are particular to certain regions of the world, such as Arabic, Chinese, Russian, French and Spanish (Pei, 1997). Lingua franca can be spoken in a variety of ways. English, from example, is used a as a lingua franca in many parts of the world for trade, commerce, tourism; However, the usage of the language by

Ashfaq Aslam
different speakers are by no means homogenous. And the ability of individual speakers vary from person to person, for some it is their native language and for many others it either a foreign or second language. The variance in ability lies in the last two categories of speakers, from being native-like to only possessing the rudiments of the language. (Wardhaugh, 1992)

A Pidgin language arises when there is interaction between three or more language groups, and one of the three languages are dominant. Linguists argue that when only two languages are present there arises a struggle between the two languages for dominance, as was the struggle between English and French in 1606. After more than two centuries of struggle, in this case, the socially inferior language assumed dominance. When there is a social situation, where there are three or more language groups who have a linguistic need for fulfil some purpose, and one of the three languages assumes a position of dominance, conditions are ripe for the emergence of a pidgin language. The social condition dictates that not only the two inferior languages groups must speak to the dominant language group; the two inferior language group have a need to communicate with each other. This leads to the simplification of the dominant language. However, this simplification may or may not have certain universal characteristics. This hypothesis produces a plausible explanation to the origins of pidgins. This claim is further substantiated by examining pidgins present in slave societies, as slaves were drawn from different linguistic background and this led the emergence of pidgins among slave societies. Pidgins found in the sea coast, also, support this hypothesis as peoples from various language backgrounds are likely to meet in the coast for trading. Another striking evidence in support of this hypothesis is that pidginised variety of languages are used by people who cannot communicate in the standard form of the language. Pidgin Chinese English, for example, was mainly used by speakers of different Chinese languages and Tok Pisin is used in Papua New Guinea as a unifying language among many speakers of different languages. In both cases few speakers of Standard English never really mastered the pidgins. There is a tendency to view Pidgins as a poor version of the standard language. As a consequent, the users of pidgins are view as socially and culturally inferior. This misconception was ripe until it was discovered that pidgins, just like standard languages,

Ashfaq Aslam
have rules which are particular them. This topic will be discussed in greater detail. (Wardhaugh, 1992) In contrast to a pidgin, a Creole, often defined as a pidgin that has become the first language of a new generation of speakers, is a normal language almost every sense. A Creole has native speakers. Just as a pidgin has a complex relationship with its associated language, so does a Creole. For example, Haitian Creole has a complex relationship with its associated language (which is French) just as Jamaican Creole does with its associated language (English). Most of the speakers of creoles and pidgins feel as though they do not speak the proper form of the language and thus it is inferior to the standard language. Even scholars use to deem pidgins and creoles as such, until recent years when its study gained much popularity.

An interesting point of observation is the process of pidginisation and creolisation. It is noted that the processes are almost diametrically opposed to each other in many ways. Pidginisation generally involves some kind of simplification of a language e.g., reduction in morphology and syntax, tolerance of considerable phonological variation, reduction in the number of functions for which the pidgin is used (e.g. you usually do not attempt to write novels in a pidgin), and extensive borrowing of words from local mother tongues. Conversely, creolisation involves expansion of morphology and syntax, regularization of the phonology, increase in the function for which it is used, and development of a ration and stable system for increasing vocabulary (Wardhaugh, 1992). Despite the many fundamental differences in its processes of development, determining a pidgin from a creole is not always easy. Both Hawaiian Pidgin English, for example, and Hawaiian Creole English are used interchangeably to describe the same variety of English. Same confusion is present when describing Tok Pisin (Bickerton, 1983).

DeCamp (1977, p. 4-5) recognised the obvious difficulty in distinguishing between pidgins and creoles and offered, what was to him, a clear cut example of each. Everyone would agree that the

Ashfaq Aslam
Juba Arabic spoken in the southern Sudan is a pidgin. In most communities it is not the native language of any of its speakers but functions as an auxiliary interlingua for communication between speakers of the many mutually unintelligible languages spoken in that region. It is a new language, only about an hundred years old. It has a small vocabulary, limited to the needs of trade and other interlingual communication, but this restricted vocabulary is supplemented, whenever the need arises, by using words from the various native languages or from normal Arabic. It has a very simple phonology with few morphemic processes. The complicated morphological system of Arabic has almost entirely eliminated. Such grammatical information is indicated by word order, by separate uninflected pronouns or auxiliaries, or else simply missing. Similarly, everyone agrees that the vernacular language of Haiti is a Creole. It is the native language of nearly all the Haitians, though standard French is spoken is spoken by some people and it is the official language. Historically it probably evolved from pidginised variety of French at the time when these began to be acquired as a native language. Because it is a native language and must perform a wide range of communicative and expressive functions, it has an extensive vocabulary and complex grammatical system comparable to that of a so-called normal language. In fact, scholars disagree on whether we could indentify Haitian as a creole if we did not know its history.

As mentioned previously, a Pidgin language emerges when there is a simplification of a normal language. However, an arbitrary simplification of the mother language will not produce meaningful pidgin words; rather it is well organised linguistic system which must be learnt by those who wish to communicate with it. For example, Haitian Creole is derived from French, a French speaker will not be able to communicate in Haitian by simplifying his use of the language to his own accord nor will he be able to comprehend a Haitian, even if he is highly proficient in French. He must learn Haitian as he would learn any other language. Nevertheless, learning Haitian would be easier for a French native speaker than it would be to an English native speaker. However, even to an English speaker learning Haitian may be easier to learn than a fully fledged language as the linguistic properties of pidgins and creoles are far less complicated than a standard language.

Ashfaq Aslam

Phonologically, Pidgins and creoles are less complicated in their arrangements than those of the corresponding standard language. For example, Tok Pisin makes use of only five basic vowels and has fewer constants than English. For example, there is no distinction between it and eat, or pin and fin, or sip and ship as these distinguishing vowels and constants which are present in English is not found in Tok Pisi. Therefore, to distinguish between a ship and sheep, the former is pronounced sip and the latter as sipsip. Similar issues are also present with regards to writing, for Tok Pisin speakers there is no distinction between /p/ and /f/, therefore one could write wanfela or wanpela; the difference is so slight that it would be judged to have been said the same way. Another important distinction is that morphemic variation is not found in pidgins; however, the development of morphemic variation is an important indicator of creolisation (Wardhaugh, 1992).

The absence of inflection in nouns, pronouns, verbs, and adjectives are, also, a feature of pidgins and creoles. Nouns, for example, lack number and gender markers and verbal tense markers. Transitive verbs however can be distinguished from intransitive verbs by a special marker in Tok Pisin. It is the suffixation of im which distinguishes them. Pronouns are not distinguished by case; therefore, I and me, he and him are the same. In Tok Pisin me signifies either I or me. But, pluralisation of pronouns is marked by the suffix pela ( yu (you singular) yupela (you plural). Syntactically, Pidgins are uncomplicated in their clause structures. Embedded clauses such as relative clauses are not found in pidgins and the development of embedded clauses signifies creolisation of the pidgin. Negation, for example, may be achieved through use of simple particle such as no only. In Krio (an English based Pidgin) i no tu had instead of its not too hard. Another interesting feature, in terms of particles, that is found is the use of it to indicate continuous aspect. For example, a de go wok (I am going to work) de is used to indicate continuous aspect. Similarly, Lousiana French ape is used for the same function mo ape travaj (I am working). (Warddhaugh, 1992) The vocabulary of a pidgin and a creole has great many similarities to that of the standard language to with which it is associated. However, phonological and morphological simplification often leads to

Ashfaq Aslam
words assuming somewhat different shapes (Wardhaugh, p.67, 1992). Duplication is used as an important tool in producing concepts such as intensification and sometimes to avoid confusion between similar sounding words. As mentioned earlier sip and sipsip is used to distinguish between ship and sheep. Look and looklook is used for look and stare (an intensified looking) and pis ( peace) and pispis (urinate). For some other concepts, convoluted phrases are used; for example, gras bilong het is used to mean hair, gras bilong fes used for beard and ka belong me for my car. (Wardhaugh, 1992)

In summary, the recent boom in studies of pidgins and creoles have led many important finding about these previously frowned upon languages. In history, pidgins and creoles were largely ignored as it was view a sub language and its speakers were associated with the poorer and darker parts of the society. As Interest grew so did the understanding of linguists about pidgins and creoles. Pidgin and creoles, just as their associated standard language, have their own history, structure and functionality. They emerge from a linguistic need that different language communities have in order to carry out certain activities such as trade. The functionality of pidgins is vastly reduced compared to a standard language. This in turn affects its linguistic features such as phonology, morphology, syntax and vocabulary. In the process of creolisation the distinction between pidgins and creoles may seem hazy and creolists use the term pidgin sometimes and creoles sometimes with reference to the same variety. However, as creolisation takes place the linguistic features of a pidgin gets refined as its range of uses and users increase, the distinction between a standard language and the creole decreases as the space between creole and a pidgin increases. The acquisition of morphemic variation and embedded clause are indication of creolisation of a language. The interest of linguists in pidgins and creoles does not seem to be fading, and with time our understanding of, not only pidgins and creoles, but languages is likely to refined with the continuing research in this field.

Ashfaq Aslam
Bibliography

Brickerton, D. (1983). Creole languages. Scientific American, 249;b116-22 Decamp, d. (1977). The development of pidgin and creole studies. New York: academic press. Meyerhoff, M. (2006). Introducing Sociolinguistic. London: Routledge. Samarin, W.J. (1973). Tongues of men and angles. New York: Macmillan Wardhaugh, R. (1992). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell

Potrebbero piacerti anche