Creolistics: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Subpagination Bot
m (Add {{subpages}} and remove any categories (details))
imported>John Stephenson
(expansion and clarification)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
{{linguistics}}
{{linguistics}}
{{langacq}}
{{langacq}}
'''Creolistics''' is the study of both [[creole language]]s and the [[pidgin]] [[language]]s from which creoles develop. Although the study of these ''[[contact language]]s'' is most often associated with [[linguistics]], it has expanded into related fields such as [[anthropology]], [[sociology]], [[history]] and [[literary studies]], because the creation of a creole invariably involves cross-[[culture|cultural]] contact.<ref>Siegel (2005: 141).</ref>  
'''Creolistics''' is the study of both [[creole (language)|creole]]s and the [[pidgin]] [[language]]s from which creoles develop. Although the study of these ''[[contact language]]s'' is most often associated with [[linguistics]], particularly [[language acquisition]] and [[sociolinguistics]], it has expanded into related fields such as [[anthropology]], [[sociology]], [[history]] and [[literary studies]], because the creation of a creole invariably involves cross-[[culture|cultural]] contact.<ref>Siegel (2005: 141).</ref> Researchers who study creole phenomena may be known as ''creolists''.
 
[[Linguist]]s who study creole phenomena may be known as ''creolists'', with their work forming a branch of ''[[sociolinguistics]]'', which comprises research on language as used in [[society]].


Creolistics has provided some revealing and controversial insights into [[language evolution]] and [[language acquisition|acquisition]]. For example, the ''[[language bioprogram hypothesis]]''<ref>e.g. Bickerton (1984).</ref> of [[Derek Bickerton]] claims that creole genesis supports ideas about the nature of language associated with [[Noam Chomsky]]; as creole [[generative grammar|grammar]]s are remarkably similar across the world,<ref>Sebba (1997: 70-72).</ref> this reflects the existence of an [[innatism|innate]] faculty for language.
Creolistics has provided some revealing and controversial insights into [[language evolution]], acquisition and use, though disagreements exist over what languages or varieties can be labelled a 'creole' or a 'pidgin', and debate continues over the nature of ''creolisation'': the role of 'simplification' or 'simpicity'; the 'life cycle' of pidgins and creoles (e.g. 'Is a pidgin a necessary prerequisite for a creole to form?' 'Does creole genesis usually lead to a ''post-creole continuum'', in which varieties differ relative to the broadest forms of the creole and the language(s) from which most vocabulary is derived?'); and the origin of grammatical structures in creoles which are absent in any preceding pidgin.<ref>Siegel (2008: 3-7).</ref>


The third of the above controversies is particularly contentious. For example, the ''[[language bioprogram hypothesis]]'' (LBH)<ref>e.g. Bickerton (1984).</ref> of [[Derek Bickerton]] claims that creole genesis supports ideas about the nature of language associated with [[Noam Chomsky]]; as creole [[generative grammar|grammar]]s are remarkably similar across the world,<ref>Sebba (1997: 70-72).</ref> this reflects the existence of an [[innatism|innate]] faculty for language. Bickerton does, however, go further than most creolists in explaining creole genesis as being largely biologically-based, and the LBH has been strongly critiqued.<ref>e.g Siegel (2008: 8; 66-78; 91-104; 133-134).</ref> Other controversial theories, such as ''[[relexification]]'',<ref>e.g. Lefebvre (1998, 2004).</ref> form part of current enquiry but as yet there is no widely-accepted account of creole genesis that satisfactorily explains most of the data.


==Footnotes==
==Footnotes==
<div class="references-2column">
{{reflist|2}}
<references/>
</div>
 
 
==References==
*Bickerton D (1984) 'The language bioprogram hypothesis.' ''Behavioral and Brain Sciences'' 7: 173-222.
*Sebba M (1997) ''Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles.'' London: Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-63024-6.
*Siegel J (2005) ' Creolization outside creolistics.' ''Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages'' 20 : 141-166.
 


==See also==
==See also==
*[[Creole (language)]]
*[[Pidgin]]
*[[Pidgin]]
*[[Creole language]]
*[[Lingua franca]]
*[[Contact language]]
*[[Contact language]]
*[[Lingua franca]]

Revision as of 05:35, 2 January 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.
Linguistics
Phonology
Syntax
Morphology
Semantics
Pragmatics
Theoretical linguistics
Generative linguistics
Cognitive linguistics
Language acquisition
First language acquisition
Second language acquisition
Applied linguistics
Psycholinguistics
Phonetics
Sociolinguistics
Creolistics
Evolutionary linguistics
Linguistic variation
Linguistic typology
Anthropological linguistics
Computational linguistics
Descriptive linguistics
Historical linguistics
Comparative linguistics
History of linguistics
Languagenaturalconstructed
Grammar
Language Acquisition
First language acquisition
Second language acquisition
Critical period hypothesis
Contrastive analysis
Fossilization
Applied linguistics
Monitor theory
Language teaching
Communicative approach
Comprehension approach
Multilingualism
Language attrition
Creolistics

Creolistics is the study of both creoles and the pidgin languages from which creoles develop. Although the study of these contact languages is most often associated with linguistics, particularly language acquisition and sociolinguistics, it has expanded into related fields such as anthropology, sociology, history and literary studies, because the creation of a creole invariably involves cross-cultural contact.[1] Researchers who study creole phenomena may be known as creolists.

Creolistics has provided some revealing and controversial insights into language evolution, acquisition and use, though disagreements exist over what languages or varieties can be labelled a 'creole' or a 'pidgin', and debate continues over the nature of creolisation: the role of 'simplification' or 'simpicity'; the 'life cycle' of pidgins and creoles (e.g. 'Is a pidgin a necessary prerequisite for a creole to form?' 'Does creole genesis usually lead to a post-creole continuum, in which varieties differ relative to the broadest forms of the creole and the language(s) from which most vocabulary is derived?'); and the origin of grammatical structures in creoles which are absent in any preceding pidgin.[2]

The third of the above controversies is particularly contentious. For example, the language bioprogram hypothesis (LBH)[3] of Derek Bickerton claims that creole genesis supports ideas about the nature of language associated with Noam Chomsky; as creole grammars are remarkably similar across the world,[4] this reflects the existence of an innate faculty for language. Bickerton does, however, go further than most creolists in explaining creole genesis as being largely biologically-based, and the LBH has been strongly critiqued.[5] Other controversial theories, such as relexification,[6] form part of current enquiry but as yet there is no widely-accepted account of creole genesis that satisfactorily explains most of the data.

Footnotes

  1. Siegel (2005: 141).
  2. Siegel (2008: 3-7).
  3. e.g. Bickerton (1984).
  4. Sebba (1997: 70-72).
  5. e.g Siegel (2008: 8; 66-78; 91-104; 133-134).
  6. e.g. Lefebvre (1998, 2004).

See also