• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What do you understand by Pidgins and Creoles? Discuss with examples why these languages are not corrupt or ungrammatical.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Holmes (2001) states that, ‘a pidgin is a language which has no native speakers’ and that ‘pidgins develop as a means of communication between people who do not have a common language.’ (Holmes, J. 2001:81) The main endeavour for speakers of a pidgin language is to enable effective communication, rather than to gain knowledge of additional languages. Pidgins are contact vernaculars and are used for specific purpose; each having its own ‘describable and distinctive linguistic structure.’ (Holmes, J. 2001:81) On Caribbean slave plantations throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, West African people were purposely separated from those who spoke the same language as themselves, so as to condense the possibility of their plotting escape or a revolt against authority. As a means of communicating with one another, they developed pidgins based on the language of their superiors as well as their own languages. (Holmes, J. 2001:81) In terms of structure, pidgins do not share any similitude to any of the languages in contact; however they do draw vocabulary items from these languages. Therefore, the term ‘pidgin’ accordingly indicates ‘a simple form of language showing signs of language mixing, which no one speaks as their first language.’ (Mesthrie et al, 2000:280) Creolist Peter Mühlhausler (1986:5) puts forward the following definition: ‘Pidgins are examples of partially targeted or non-targeted second-language learning, developing from simpler to more complex systems as communicative requirements become more demanding. (Pidgins) … are social rather than individual solutions, and hence are characterised by norms of acceptability.’ However, Mesthrie et al (2000:280) states that ‘matters can be a bit more complicated.’ Therein, researchers find it purposeful to make a distinction between pidgins in terms of how complex their grammatical structures are. Firstly, a jargon or pre-pidgin has somewhat unstable structure in the sense that it consists of rudimentary vocabulary, being ‘frequently augmented by gestures.’ (Mesthrie et al, 2000:280) Thus a pre-pidgin is not considered to be grammatical and in some instances may be thought of as a corrupt form of language. ...read more.

Middle

As a contrast to the aforementioned deficiency of adverbial suffixes within pidgin languages, the stable pidgin Fanakalo of South Africa shows the occurrence of numerous verb suffixes. However, grammatical marking in Fanakalo is comparatively undemanding in contrast to its main source language, Zulu. (Mesthrie et al, 2000:292) The following shows an example of verb suffix occurrence in Fanakalo: -ile (past tense) dlala ?to play? vs. dlalile ?played? -isa (causative) enza ?to do? vs. enzisa ?cause to be done? -wa (passive) pheka ?to cook? vs. phekwa ?is cooked? (Mesthrie et al, 2000:292) It is widely accepted that pidgins are an inferior and substandard form of language yielding low prestige in society, with many linguists labelling them as marginal and insignificant in comparison to languages that have strong grammatical substance. However, Siegel (1996) (in Mesthrie et al, 2000:292) showed, in analysis of pidgin forms, that their structure ?could be more complex than similar structures in the superstrate language.? Siegel (1996) studied the pronoun system of Bislama, a pidgin of Vanuatu. He discovered that Bislama does not make any distinction in gender pronouns, (a grammatical element that is often omitted in pidgins) and may therefore appear to be simpler in structure than in English language wherein the gender forms he, she and it are used. However Bislama differentiates between ?inclusive? and ?exclusive? pronouns, a distinction which the English language does not include. Therein, Bislama uses the first-person inclusive pronoun ?yumi,? meaning ?we or us, including you,? and the divergent first-person exclusive pronoun ?mifala,? meaning ?we or us, not including you.? Therefore, Bislama grammar makes it explicit whether the listener is included (yumi) or not (mifala). (Mesthrie et al, 2000:292) The complexity of the inclusive and exclusive pronouns in Bislama is attributable to extended, rather than restricted pidgin forms. These grammatical rules demonstrate that although a pidgin is a diffused adaptation of input languages, they carry their own grammatical structure that is largely effective and successful in communication, although composed of both simplified structure and limited vocabulary. ...read more.

Conclusion

This however, is not necessary purely due to the power of inference and implication, of which Creole forms often rely upon. Pidgins and Creoles can be considered grammatical and uncorrupted forms of language in the sense that they both have their own grammatical regulations, albeit not as complex as their substrate and superstrate languages. Furthermore, the primary endeavour of a pidgin is to effectively communicate when one or more languages are unintelligible: this endeavour is successful, thus a pidgin can consequently be regarded as a recognisable form of language. In addition, a Creole is a language that has become the first language of a speech community; therein the grammatical structure, as well as vocabularical elements develop accordingly and become an inherent fixture of the Creole. With regards to the examples provided, they illustrate that both pidgin and Creole forms constitute their own unique grammar and vocabulary, formed from one or more ‘full’ languages. The creation of a new language form should not be considered neither ‘ungrammatical’ nor ‘corrupt,’ as language will inevitably continue to develop and revolutionise in accordance with societal needs. REFERENCES Bakker, P (1995) ‘Pidgins’ in Arends et al. (eds) pp 25-39 Bickerton (1976) Pidgin and Creole Studies. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol 5, pp 169-193 Hall, R, A (1966) Pidgin and Creole Languages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Hewitt, R (1986) White talk, Black talk – Inter-racial friendship and communication amongst adolescents. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Holm, J (1988) Pidgins and Creoles. Vol 1: Theory and Structure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Holmes, J (2001) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 2nd ed. Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh Gate. Lefebvre, C (2004) Issues in the study of pidgin and creole languages. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Mesthrie et al (2000) Introducing Sociolinguistics Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Montgomery, M (1995) An Introduction to Language and Society. 2nd ed. Routledge, London. Mühlhausler, P (1986) Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Romaine, S (1988) Pidgin and Creole Languages. Longman, London. Todd, L (1984) Modern Englishes: Pidgins and Creoles. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. Todd, L (1994) ‘Pidgins and Creoles,’ in R, Asher (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Argumentative or Persuasive Essays section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Argumentative or Persuasive Essays essays

  1. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of both the Prescriptive and Descriptive approaches to language. ...

    This is the third strength of the prescriptive method. This strength is based on the principle of standing against the irresponsible and careless use of grammar. Those who prefer the prescriptive method do not want to see a language die or inevitably change from misuse or abuse - they want to preserve it at any cost.

  2. Prepositional and Phrasal Verbs

    It would be impossible for this sentence to have a direct object. Other phrasal verbs can be both intransitive and transitive, like the verb burn down. The sentences The house burned down and The man burned down the house are both grammatically correct.

  1. What is discourse analysis? Discuss with reference to multidisciplinarity and a selection of relevant ...

    Although quite distinct differences between the two, they sometimes join or overlap. American linguist, Benjamin Whorf, is quoted as saying ?Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about? (Whorf, 1956. Pg: 213) Discourse analysis is neither a qualitative or quantative research method but rather questions the basic assumptions of these two methods.

  2. Bruner and Wittgenstein: Language Learning

    The assertion of a modified Chomskian view in Bruner's Child Talk, apart from the fact that its explanatory benefit is circular, may create more problems than it solves. The introduction of a device that helps us acquire language seemingly serves the purpose of providing an explanation where none more intelligible can be found ? deus (lingua)

  1. Comparing the pesentation of a political story in two British newspapers.

    However, I was mistaken about the positivity and positioning of the Article 1 ? there aren?t many positive lexis occurrences or mood adjuncts in the text and it is rather neutral than positive with author being more objective and impartial than I initially thought and article text 2 is, as

  2. Discuss the cultural and political history that led English to become a world language. ...

    The first permanent English colonisation settlement overseas dates from 1607, when colonists arrived in what was to be named Jamestown and Virginia, after James I and the ?virgin Queen? Elizabeth. (Crystal, D. 1997:26) In November 1620, the first group of Puritans, thirty-five members of the English Separatist Church, and

  1. What makes a new word successful? A response to Metcalfs FUDGE Model

    Metcalf appears to be extremely general in his methods of analysing new words. Although his five factors seem to be relevant, it is not believable that they are the only jointly sufficient features that determine a word?s success. Furthermore the generality of some of the levels within the factors hold problems for certain types of words.

  2. In Carver's Jerry and Molly and Sam, the main character, Al, is a ...

    Also, he does not like Suzy, but he forgets that he should be bearing the responsibility for Suzy?s irritating behaviour. If Al is not a failure in all these aspects of his life, he would probably not become so hopeless and give up on changing his negative attitude towards everything;

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work