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. 293–313

Chapter 13
Cognitive creolistics and semantic primes

A phylogenetic network analysis

| Roskilde University, Aarhus University
| Aarhus University
This study presents a semantics-driven lexical comparison of 20 creole languages and five European lexifier languages. Breaking new ground into understanding creole semantics, it utilizes insights from both cognitive semantics (in particular, the Natural Semantic Metalanguage approach) and phylogenetic approaches to linguistics comparisons. We provide an extensive study of label-meaning correlations as a way of exploring the relationship between word labels and word meanings across creoles and lexifiers. We conclude that creoles are not simply “versions” of their lexifier languages, and that it is misleading to say that creoles are “based” on European languages in their basic lexical-semantic configuration. At the same time, we find that creoles do relate more closely to their historical lexifiers than to other creoles, and that the lexical-semantic perspective adds a new dimension to the typology of creoles, nuancing the pictures from grammar-based comparisons.
Keywords: lexical semantics, cognitive creolistics, semantic primes, cross-creole comparison, creole-lexifier comparison
Article outline
  • 13.1Introduction
  • 13.2Exponents of semantic primes across creole languages
    • 13.2.1Materials
  • 13.3Character coding and phylogenetic algorithm
  • 13.4Results
  • 13.5Discussion
  • 13.6Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • 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.211.13lev
References (80)
References
Aboh, E. O., Veenstra, T. & Smith, N. S. H. 2013. Saramaccan structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Alleyne, M. 2014. A reformist approach to the creole concept. Keynote speech at the Aruba SCL/SPCL/ACBLPE conference 2014, Aruba.Google Scholar
Baker, P. & Kriegel, S. 2013. Mauritian Creole structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google 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
Baptista, M. 2013. Cape Verdean Creole of Brava structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Bartens, A. 2013. Nicaraguan Creole English structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Bartens, A. & Sandström, N. 2006. Semantic primes in Atlantic Iberomance-based creoles: Superstrate continuity or innovation? Estudios de Sociolinguística 7 (1): 31–54.Google Scholar
Bible Society of The West Indies. 2012. Di Jamiekan nyuu testiment. Kingston: Bible Society of The West Indies.Google Scholar
Blench, R. 2005. A Dictionary of Nigerian English. <[URL]> (31 May 2015)
Bowern, C. 2008. Linguistic Fieldwork: A Practical Guide. New York NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryant, D. & Moulton, V. 2004. Neighbor-Net: An agglomerative algorithm for the construction of phylogenetic networks. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21(2): 255–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bromhead, H. 2009. The Reign of Truth and Faith: Epistemic Expressions in 16th and 17th Century English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. Ethnogeographical categories in English and Pitjantjatjara/Yankunjtjatjara. Language Sciences 33(1): 58–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, L. 2014. Biesik Jumiekan: Introduction to Jamaican Language. Washington DC: Gnosophia.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. & Smith, N. 1977. Lingua descriptive series questionnaire. Lingua 42: 1–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crowley, T. 1990. Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The Emergence of a National Language in Vanuatu. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
DeGraff, M. 2001. The origins of creoles: A Cartesian critique of Neo-Darwinian Linguistics. Linguistic Typology 5: 213–310.Google Scholar
2005. Linguists’ most dangerous myth. The fallacy of creole exceptionalism. Language in Society 34: 533–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
den Besten, H. & Biberauer, T. 2013. Afrikaans structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
de Jong, J. P. B. de Josselin. 1926. Het huidige Negerhollandsch (Texten en woordenlijst). Amsterdam: Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Ehrhart, S. & Revis, M. 2013. Tayo structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. 2015. The Utility of Meaning: What Words Mean and Why. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Faraclas. N. 1996. Nigerian Pidgin. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faraclas, N. 2013. Nigerian Pidgin structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fattier, D. 2013. Haitian Creole structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Farquharson, J. T. 2013. Jamaican structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Goddard, C. (ed.). 2008. Cross-Linguistic Semantics [Studies in Language Companion Series 102]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goddard, C. & Wierzbicka, A. (eds). 1994. Semantics and Lexical Universals: Theory and Empirical Findings [Studies in Language Companion Series 25]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds). 2002. Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and Empirical Findings, Vols. 1–2 [Studies in Language Companion Series 60–61]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2014a: Words and Meanings: Lexical Semantics across Domains, Languages, and Cultures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2014b. Semantic fieldwork and lexical universals. Studies in Language 38(1): 80–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goilo, E. R. 1972. Papiamentu Textbook. Aruba: De Wit Stores.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): 49–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hagemeijer, T. 2013. Santome structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Hancock, I. F. 1985. Diversity and development in English-related Creoles. Ann Arbor MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Holm, J. 2001. The semicreole identity of Afrikaans lects: Parallel cases of partial restructuring. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 13(4): 353–379.Google Scholar
Holm, J. & Intumbo, I. 2009. Quantifying superstrate and substrate influence. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 24(2): 218–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hualde, J. I. & Schwegler, A. 2008. Intonation in Palenquero. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 22(2): 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kouwenberg, S. S. 1994. A Grammar of Berbice Dutch Creole. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013a. Berbice Dutch structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
2013b. Papiamentu structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Kouwenberg, S. S. & Murray, E. 1994. Papiamentu. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, C. (ed.). 2011. Creoles, their Substrates, and Language Typology [Typological Studies in Language 95]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C., Meira, S. & the Language and Cognition Group. 2003. ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain – adpositional meanings in cross-linguistic perspective: an exercise in semantic typology. Language 79(3): 485–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C. 2015. Scandinavian semantics and the human body: an ethnolinguistic study in diversity and change. Language Sciences 49: 51–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C. & Jogie, M. 2015. The Trinidadian “Theory of Mind”: Personhood and postcolonial semantics. International Journal of Language and Culture 2(2): 169–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C. & Priestley, C. 2017. Social keywords in postcolonial Melanesian discourse: kastom ‘traditional culture’ and tumbuna ‘ancestors’. In Cultural Keywords in Discourse, C. Levisen & S. Waters (eds), 83–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C., Sippola, E. & Aragón, K. 2016. Color and visuality in Iberoromance creoles. In Color Language and Color Categorization. G. Paulsen, M. Uusküla & J. Brindle (eds), 270–301. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Majid, A., Enfield, N. J. & van Staden, M. 2006. Parts of the body: Cross-linguistic categorization. Language Sciences 28: 137–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Majid, A., Jordan F. & Dunn, M. 2015. Semantic systems in closely related languages. Language Sciences 49: 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matisoff, J. 2004. Areal semantics – is there such a thing? In Himalayan Languages: Past and Present, Anju Saxena (ed.), 347–394. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, J. 2001. The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic Typology 5 (2–3): 125–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. Linguistic Simplicity and Complexity: Why do Languages Undress. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, J. & Good, J. 2012. A Grammar of Saramaccan Creole. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, S. (ed.). 2008. Roots of Creole Structures: Weighing the Contribution of Substrates and Superstrates [Creole Language Library 33]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, S. M., Maurer, P., Haspelmath, M. & Huber, M. (eds). 2013. Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Mühleisen, S. 2013. Trinidad English Creole structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Neumann, I. 1985. Le créole de Breaux Bridge, Louisiane: Etude morphosyntaxique – textes – vocabulaire. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Neumann-Holzschuh, I. & Klingler, T. A. 2013. Louisiana Creole structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Nicholls, S. 2013. Cultural scripts, social cognition and social interaction in Roper Kriol. Australian Journal of Linguistics 33: 282–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peeters, B. (ed). 2006. Semantic Primes and Universal Grammar: Empirical evidence from the Romance languages [Studies in Language 81]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Priestley, C. 2008. The semantic of “inalienable possession” in Koromu (PNG). In Cross-Linguistic Semantics [Studies in Language Companion Series 102], C. Goddard (ed.), 277–300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Koromu temporal expressions. In Space and Time in Languages and Cultures: Language, Culture and Cognition [Human Cognitive Processing 36], L. Filipovic & K. Jaszczolt (eds), 143–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Social categories, shared experience, reciprocity and endangered meanings: Examples from Koromu (PNG). Australian Journal of Linguistics 33: 257–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robertson, I. E. 1989. Berbice and Skepi Dutch: A lexical comparison. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 105: 3–21.Google Scholar
Sabino, R. 2012. Giving Jack his Jacket – Language Contact in the Danish West Indies. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwegler, A. 2013. Palenquero structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Stanwood, R. E. 1997. The primitive syntax of mental predicates in Hawai’i Creole English: A text-based study. Language Sciences 19(3): 209–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999. On the Adequacy of Hawai’i Creole English. PhD dissertation, University of Hawai’i.Google Scholar
Swadesh, M. 1971. The Origin and Diversification of Language, J. Sherzer (ed.). Chicago IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Travis, C. 2005. Discourse Markers in Columbian Spanish: A Study in Polysemy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
van Rossem, C. & van der Voort, H. 1996. Die Creol Taal: 250 years of Negerhollands texts. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Velupillai, V. 2013. Hawai‘i Creole structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds).Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. 2006. English: Meaning and Culture. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Bodies and their parts: An NSM approach to semantic typology. Language Sciences 29(1): 14–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Imprisoned in English. The Hazards of English as the Default Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Winer, L. 1993. Trinidad and Tobago [Varieties of English around the World T6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Dictionary of the English/Creole of Trinidad and Tobago. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Winford, D. & Plag, I. 2013. Sranan structure dataset. In Michaelis et al. (eds). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolf, H. G. & Polzenhagen, F. 2009. World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach. Berlin: De Gruyer Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Bakker, Peter
2023. Empiricism against imperialism. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 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.