The Creole Debate
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17184/eac.anthropen.118Keywords:
Creole exceptionalism,, Superstratism, Creole prototype, Postcolonialism, LinguisticsAbstract
This entry summarizes the debate that has been raging for more than 20 years between the proponents of creoles as a distinct class of languages among the world’s languages (the exceptionalist approach) and the proponents of the socio-historical approach who reject the term creole as a principle of classification. It seeks to analyze the issues at stake in this war over creoles.
References
Aboh, Enoch O. (2015), The Emergence of Hybrid Languages. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Aboh, Enoch O. (2017), « The emergence of hybrid grammars: A rejoinder to Peter Bakker », Word, Vol. 63, n°3, p. 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2017.1347316
Aboh, Enoch O. et Michel DeGraff (2017), « A null theory of creole formation based on Universal Grammar », in Ian Roberts (dir.), The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar. Oxford Handbooks Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199573776.013.18
Ansaldo, Umberto (2017), « Creole complexity in sociolinguistic perspective », Language Sciences, Vol. 60, p. 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.10.008
Ansaldo, Umberto (2018), « Complexity reboot: A rejoinder to Parkvall, Bakker and McWhorter ». Language Sciences, Vol. 66, p. 234-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.01.001
Ansaldo, Umberto et Stephen J. Matthews (2001), « Typical creoles and simple languages: the case of Sinitic », Linguistic Typology, Vol. 5, 3/4, p. 311-325.
Ansaldo, Umberto, Stephen J. Matthews et Lisa Lim (dir.) (2007), Deconstructing Creoles, Amsterdam, John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.73
Bakker, Peter (2016), «Creoles as hybrid languages», Word, Vol. 62, n°4, p. 228-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2016.1248655
Bakker, Peter (2017), « Reply to Enoch Aboh’s rejoinder to my article on his book ‘The emergence of hybrid grammars’ », Word, Vol. 63, n°3, p. 223-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2017.1360544
Bakker, Peter, Aymeric Daval-Markussen, Mikael Parkvall et Ingo Plag (2011), « Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 26, n°1, p. 5-42. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.26.1.02bak
Bickerton, Derek (2004), « Reconsidering creole exceptionalism », Language, Vol. 80, n°4, p. 828-833. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0164
Blasi, Damián E., Susanne Maria Michaelis et Martin Haspelmath (2017), « Grammars are robustly transmitted even during the emergence of creole languages », Nature Human Behavior, Vol. 1, p. 723–729. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0192-4
Bonami, Olivier et Ana R. Luís (2013), « A morphologist perspective on Creole complexity », 19e Congrès International des Linguistes, Genève. http://www.llf.cnrs.fr/sites/llf.cnrs.fr/files/biblio/CIL.pdf
Braun, Maria et Ingo Plag (2003), « How transparent is creole morphology? A study of early Sranan word-formation », Yearbook of Morphology 2002, p. 81-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48223-1_4
DeGraff, Michel (2001a), « Morphology in Creole genesis: linguistics and ideology », in Michael J Kenstowicz (dir.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Cambridge MA, MIT Press, p. 53-121.
DeGraff, Michel (2001b), « On the origin of creoles: a Cartesian critique of Neo-Darwinian linguistics », Linguistic Typology, Vol. 5, 2/3, p. 213-310.
DeGraff, Michel (2003), « Against creole exceptionalism », Language, Vol. 79, n°2, p. 391-410.
https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0114
DeGraff, Michel (2004), « Against creole exceptionalism (Redux) ». Language, Vol. 80, n°4, p. 834-839. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0178
DeGraff, Michel (2005), « Linguists’most dangerous myth: The fallacy of Creole exceptionalism », Language in Society, Vol. 34, p. 533-591. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050207
Good, Jeff (2015), « Paradigmatic complexity in pidgins and creoles », Word Structure, Vol. 8, p. 184-227. https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2015.0081
Grant, Anthony (2018), Compte rendu de « McWhorter, John H. The Creole Debate », Journal of Ibero-Romance Creoles, Vol. 8, p. 65-69.
Kouwenberg, Silvia et John Victor Singler (2018), « Creolization in context: historical and typological perspectives », Annual Review of Linguistics 4, p.213-232. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040544
Luís, Ana (2010), « The loss and survival of inflectional morphology: Contextual vs. inherent inflection in creoles », in Sonia Colina, Antxon Olarrea et Ana Carvalho (dir.), p. 323-336. Romance Linguistics 2009, Amsterdam, John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.315.19lui
McWhorter, John H. (1998), « Identifying the creole prototype: vindicating a typological class », Language, Vol. 74, n°4, p. 788-818. https://doi.org/10.2307/417003
McWhorter, John H. (2001a), « The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars », Linguistic Typology 5, 3/4, p. 125-156. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2001.001
McWhorter, John H. (2001b), « What people ask David Gil and why: Rejoinder to the replies », Linguistic Typology 5, 3/4, p. 388-412. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2001.003
McWhorter, John H. et Mikael Parkvall. (2002), « Pas tout à fait du français : une étude créole ». Études créoles 3, Vol. 25, n°1, p. 179-231.
McWhorter, John H. (2005), « Defining Creole », New York, Oxford University Press.
McWhorter, John H. (2011), « Tying up loose ends: the creole prototype after all », Diachronica 28, p.82-117. https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.28.1.04mcw
McWhorter, John H. (2012a), « Case closed? Testing the Feature Pool hypothesis », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 27, n°1, p. 171-182. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.27.1.07mcw
McWhorter, John H. (2012b), « The nature of argument. Is the creole exceptionalism dead? », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 27, n°2, p. 377-387. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.27.2.07mcw
McWhorter, John H. (2013), « It’s not over. Why it matters whether there is such a thing as a creole », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 28, n°2, p. 409-423. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.28.2.05mcw
McWhorter, John H. (2018), The Creole Debate, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108553308
McWhorter, John H. (2019), « On "counterexamples" to the creole prototype: Why Riau Indonesian is a Creole and Chinese Isn't ». https://www.academia.edu/36807179/ON_COUNTEREXAMPLES_TO_THE_CREOLE_PROTOTYPE_Why_Riau_Indonesian_is_a_Creole_and_Chinese_Isnt
Mufwene, Salikoko (2001), The Ecology of Language Evolution, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612862
Mufwene, Salikoko (2014), « The case was never closed », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 29, n°1, p. 157-171. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.29.1.06muf
Parkvall, Mikael, Peter Bakker et John McWhorter (2018), « Creoles and sociolinguistic complexity: a response to Ansaldo », Language Sciences, Vol. 66, p. 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2017.10.001
Plag, Ingo (2008), « Creoles as interlanguages: inflectional morphology », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 23, n°1, p.114-135. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.23.1.06pla
Siegel, Jeff, Benedikt Szmrecsanji et Bernd Kortmann (2014), « Measuring analyticity and syntheticity in creoles », Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, Vol. 29, n°1, p. 49-85. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.29.1.02sie
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Anthropen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Unless otherwise stated, content comprised on this website, including text, photographs, illustrations, trademarks, logos, audio or video clips, is protected by copyright law. All rights, titles and interests in the content belong exclusively to Anthropen. With the exception of works licensed under CC BY NC ND 4.0 any copying, reproduction, distribution, total or partial modification is strictly prohibited without the written permission of Anthropen and may expose the offender to legal sanctions.