Preverbal no-negation in Gullah
Modern Sea Island Gullah is unusual among Atlantic English-based creoles in reportedly not having no as a preverbal negator, ẽ or ɛ̃ ‘ain’t’ being used instead, and doubts have been expressed about any earlier extensive use of no. However, important authentic evidence of its earlier use is provided by the 1838–39 journal of Fanny Kemble (1863) and by letters written during Northern occupation in the Civil War. Among literary writers, Simms (1839/1845) used no 22% of the time vs. 8% for ain’t, while no is near-categorical in Harris (1881), though rare in Jones (1888), and absent in Christensen (1892) and Gonzales (1922). Turner (1949) recorded preverbal no co-occurring with another signature creole marker, Subject me, suggesting code-switching to a basilectal grammar. Hancock (1987) also found no in Gullah. The dominant use of preverbal no in Texas Afro-Seminole (Hancock 2006) could reflect its earlier greater prevalence in the Sea Islands. The evidence raises the possibility that Gullah speakers’ practice of avoiding basilectal use with outside interlocutors (the ‘observer’s paradox’) may have obscured recognition of its modern survival.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Hackert, Stephanie & Alexander Laube
Troike, Rudolph C.
2015.
CREOLE /L → /R IN AFRICAN AMERICAN English/Gullah: HISTORICAL FACT AND FICTION.
American Speech 90:1
► pp. 6 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
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.