Cover not available
Part of
Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches
Edited by Peter Bakker, Finn Borchsenius, Carsten Levisen and Eeva M. Sippola
[Not in series 211] 2017
► pp. 103–140

Chapter 6
Creole typology II

Typological features of creoles: from early proposals to phylogenetic approaches and comparisons with non-creoles

 | Aarhus University
 | Aarhus University
In the late 1950s, creolists started drawing lists of shared lexical and grammatical properties of creole languages. In this chapter, a number of proposals and features are presented. We show that few of the proposed common properties are in fact shared by all creoles. We also discuss typological studies in which samples of creoles are compared with samples of non-creoles. Creoles, despite their diversity, tend to cluster in a different pattern from non-creoles, even when non-European creoles are added, providing robust evidence for a creole typological profile. Finally, the chapter deals with the neglected area of diachronic aspects of creoles. No systematic surveys comparing language change in creoles and non-creoles have yet been conducted. The pre-existence of a pidgin phase is a plausible explanation for some of the major differences observed between creoles and non-creoles.
Article outline
  • 6.1Introduction
  • 6.2Claims about typological properties of creoles, 1950s–2000s
    • 6.2.1 Taylor (1971)
    • 6.2.2 Markey (1982)
    • 6.2.3Bickerton (1981, 1984)
    • 6.2.4 Baker (2001)
    • 6.2.5 Muysken & Law (2001)
    • 6.2.6 Holm & Patrick (2007)
      • 1.Unmarked verbs
      • 2.Anterior (or past) tense
      • 3.Progressive aspect
      • 4.Habitual marker
      • 5.Completive aspect
      • 6.Irrealis mode
      • 7.Other combinations of verbal markers
      • 8.Complementizers
      • 9.Dependent clauses
      • 10.Negation
      • 11.Passive
      • 12.Adjectives as verbs?
      • 13.The copula
      • 14.Serial verbs
      • 15.Noun phrase
      • 16.Possession
      • 17.Pronouns: case distinctions
      • 18.Coordinating conjunctions
      • 19.Prepositions
      • 20.Miscellaneous
    • 6.2.7 Szmrecsanyi & Kortmann (2009)
    • 6.2.8 Cysouw (2009)
    • 6.2.9Mauritian Creole and proposed creole features (Grant & Guillemin 2012)
    • 6.2.10Summary of structural overviews and conclusions
  • 6.3Mass comparisons of creoles and non-creoles
    • 6.3.1Holm & Patrick’s creole sample among the languages of the world
    • 6.3.2WALS features: Non-creoles and creoles
    • 6.3.3WALS features and APiCS features compared
    • 6.3.4The four WALS features that set creoles apart from non-creoles
    • 6.3.5Surinamese creoles, the lexifiers and the Gbe and Kikongo substrates
    • 6.3.6Summary mass comparisons
  • 6.4Diachrony and creoles
    • 6.4.1Pidgins
    • 6.4.2Grammaticalization
    • 6.4.3Phonological processes
    • 6.4.4Speed of change
    • 6.4.5Summary: Change
  • 6.5Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 31 May 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.211.06dav
References (66)
References
Aboh, E. & Ansaldo, U. 2007. The role of typology in language creation: A descriptive take. In Deconstructing Creole [Typological Studies in Language 73], U. Ansaldo, S. Matthews, & L. Lim (eds), 39–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, P. 2001. No creolisation without prior pidginization? Te Reo 44(1): 31–50.Google Scholar
Bakker, P. 1987. Autonomous Languages. Signed and Spoken Languages Created by Children in the Light of Bickerton’s Bioprogram Hypothesis [Publikaties van het Instituut voor Algemene Taalwetenschap 53]. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
2014a. Creoles and typology: Problems of sampling and definition. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 29(2): 437–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014b. Creolistics: back to square one? Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 29(1): 177–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakker, P., Daval-Markussen, A., Parkvall, M. & Plag, I. 2011. Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 26(1): 5–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becker, A. & Veenstra, T. 2003. The survival of inflectional morphology in French-related creoles. Second Language Acquisition 25: 283–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bender, L. 1987. Some possible African creoles: A pilot study. In Pidgin and Creole Languages. Essays in Memory of John E. Reinecke, G. G. Gilbert (ed.), 37–60. Honolulu HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Bickerton, D. 1981. Roots of Language. Ann Arbor MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
1984. The Language Bioprogram Hypothesis. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7(1): 173–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruyn, A. 1995. Grammaticalization in Creoles: The Development of Determiners and Relative Clauses in Sranan. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
Chaudenson, R. 1992. Des îles, des hommes, des langues: Essais sur la créolisation linguistique et culturelle. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Cysouw, M. 2009. APiCS, WALS, and the creole typological profile (if any). Paper presented at the 1st APiCS conference, Leipzig, 5–8 November.Google Scholar
Daval-Markussen, A. 2013. First steps towards a typological profile of creoles. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 45(2): 274–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeGraff, M. 2003. Against creole exceptionalism. Language 79: 391–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68: 81–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013a. Indefinite articles. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]> (1 November 2014).
2013b. Negative morphemes. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]> (5 July 2015)
Givón, T. 1981. On the development of the numeral ‘one’ as an indefinite marker. Folia Linguistica Historica 2: 35–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1984. Syntax. A Functional-Typological Introduction, Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, A. P. 2009. Admixture, structural transmission, simplicity, and creolisation. In Simplicity and Complexity in Creoles and Pidgins, N. Faraclas & T. B. Klein (eds), 125–152. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Grant, A. & Guillemin, D. 2012. The complex of creole typological features. The case of Mauritian Creole. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 27(1): 48–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, R. A., Jr. 1958. Creole languages and genetic relationships. Word 14(1): 367–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1959. Neo-Melanesian and glottochronology. International Journal of American Linguistics 25: 265–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1966. Pidgin and Creole Languages. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hancock, I. F. 1975. Malacca Creole Portuguese: Asian, African Or European? Anthropological Linguistics 17(5): 211–236.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D. & Comrie B. (eds). 2005. The World Atlas of Linguistic Structures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Heine, B. 1997. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Heine, B. & Kuteva, T. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holm, J. 1988. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. I: Theory and Structure. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Holm, J. & Patrick, P. L. 2007. Comparative Creole Syntax. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Janson. T. 1984. Articles and plural formation in creoles: Change and universals. Lingua 64: 291–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jansson, F., Parkvall, M., & Strimling, P. 2015. Modeling the evolution of creoles. Language Dynamics and Change 5(1): 1–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, W. & Perdue, C. 1997. The basic variety. Or: Couldn’t natural language be much simpler? Second Language Research 13: 301–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kortmann, B., Schneider, E., Burridge, K., Mesthrie, R. & Upton, C. (eds). 2004. A Handbook of Varieties of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kouwenberg, S. 1994. A Grammar of Berbice Dutch Creole. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Berbice Dutch (Creole Dutch). In Comparative Creole Syntax, J. Holm & P. L. Patrick (eds), 25–52. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Markey, T. L. 1982. Afrikaans: Creole or non-creole? Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 49 (1): 169–207.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. H. 1998. Identifying the creole prototype. Vindicating a typological class. Language 74(4): 788–818. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001. The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic Typology 5 (1): 125–166.Google Scholar
2005. Defining Creole. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2011. Tying up loose ends. The creole prototype after all. Diachronica 28(1): 82–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, S. M., Maurer, P., Haspelmath, M. & Huber, M. (eds). 2013. The Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Structures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. 1996. The founder principle in creole genesis. Diachronica 13(1): 83–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015a. Pidgins and creole Languages. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn, Vol. 18, J. D. Wright, (ed.), 133–145. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015b. L’émergence des parlers créoles et l’évolution des langues romanes: Faits, mythes et ideologies. Études Créoles 2: 11–39.Google Scholar
Mühlhäusler, P. 1997. Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, expanded and revised edn. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Muysken, P. 2015. Conclusion: Feature distribution in the West Africa-Surinam Trans-Atlantic Sprachbund. In Surviving the Middle Passage. The West Africa-Surinam Sprachbund, P. C. Muysken, N. Smith & R. D. Borges (eds), 393–408. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, P. & Law, P. 2001. Creole studies: A theoretical linguist’s field guide. Glot International 5(2): 47–57.Google Scholar
Muysken, P. C., Smith, N. & Borges, R. D. (eds). 2015. Surviving the Middle Passage. The West Africa-Surinam Sprachbund. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkvall, M. 2000. Out of Africa: African Influences in Atlantic Creoles. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
2008. The simplicity of creoles in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Language Complexity. Typology, Contact, Change, M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki & F. Karlsson (eds), 265–285. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkvall, M., Jansson, F. & Strimling, P. 2014. Simulating the genesis of Mauritian. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia: International Journal of Linguistics 45(2): 265–273. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Pentland, D. H. 1979. Causes of rapid phonological change: The case of Atsina and its relatives. Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics 5: 99–137.Google Scholar
Robertson, I. 2006. Challenging the definition of creole. In Exploring the Boundaries of Caribbean Creole Languages, H. Simmons-McDonald & I. Robertson (eds), 3–20. Mona, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.Google Scholar
Romaine, S. 1988. Pidgin and Creole languages. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ross, M. D. 1996. Contact-induced change and the comparative method: Cases from Papua New Guinea. In The Comparative Method Reviewed: Regularity and Irregularity in Language Change, M. Durie & M. D. Ross (eds), 180–217. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Saitou, N. & Nei, M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4(4): 406–425.Google Scholar
Smith, N. 2008. Creole phonology. In The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, S. Kouwenberg & J. V. Singler (eds), 98–129. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stassen, L. 2013. Predicative possession. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]> (11 June 2015)
Stolz, T. 1987. Kreolistik und Germanistik: Niederländisch-basierte Sprachformen in Übersee. Linguistische Berichte 110(1): 283–318.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B. & Kortmann, B. 2009. The morphosyntax of varieties of English worldwide: A quantitative perspective. Lingua 119(1): 1643–1663. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, D. 1956. Language contacts in the West Indies. Word 12(1): 399–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1971. Grammatical and lexical affinities of creoles. In Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, D. Hymes (ed.), 293–296. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Taylor, D. R. 1977. Languages of the West Indies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Veenstra, T. 2008. Creole genesis: The impact of the Language Bioprogram. In The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, S. Kouwenberg & J. V. Singler (eds), 219–241. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Kouwenberg, Silvia & John Victor Singler
2020. Are creoles a special type of language?. In Advances in Contact Linguistics [Contact Language Library, 57], ► pp. 108 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.