Cover not available
To be specified published In:
Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
Vol. 32:2 (2017) ► pp.398–415
Guest Column

Competing I-grammars in creole genesis

A synchronic and diachronic view

| University of Michigan |
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The traditional creole continuum
    • 2.1A variety of perspectives on the continuum
    • 2.2The creole continuum and its limitations: Lack of descriptive and explanatory adequacy
  • 3.Variation and competing I-grammars
    • 3.1I-language vs. E-language and I-language vs. multiple I-languages
  • 4.Variation in the auxiliary domain of Cape Verdean Creole
    • 4.1Defining the variable and its variants
    • 4.2The Cape Verdean variable and its variants
  • 5.Competing I-languages in diachrony
  • 6.On the nature and development of I-grammars
    • 6.1Revisiting the original puzzle
    • 6.2Tying a loose end: accounting for competing co-existing forms
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.32.2.07bap
References (27)
References
Baptista, Marlyse. 2017. Competition and selection in creole genesis: How "minimalist" languages yield maximal output. Guest Column (3). Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 32(1). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016a. Creole formation and L2 acquisition: On re-evaluating processes and labels. Guest Column (2). Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 31(2). 361–389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016b. Stepping back to move forward: An introspection on the history of some key questions driving our field. Guest Column (1). Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 31(1). 184–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Continuum and variation in creole languages: Out of many voices, one language. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 30(2). 225–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, Elizabeth & Brian MacWhinney. 1987. Competition, variation and language learning. In Brian MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of language change, 157–193. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Epstein, Samuel. 2016. Why nurture is natural too. Biolinguistics 101. 197–201.Google Scholar
Guasti, Maria Teresa. 2004. Language acquisition: The growth of grammar. Cambridge, US: Bradford Books, Publishers, Incorporated.Google Scholar
Holm, John. 1988. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. 11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert, Jairo Nunes & Kleanthes Grohmann. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le Page, R. B. & Andrée Tabouret-Keller. 1986. Acts of Identity: Creole-based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 2006. How New Languages Emerge. Cambridge: Cambride University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ligthfoot, David. 2016. Rethinking catastrophes and big, gross data. Manuscript.
Lipski, John. n.d. On the source of the infinitive in Romance-derived pidgins and creoles. Manuscript.
MacWhinney, Brian & Elizabeth Bates (eds.). 1989. The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko & Martha Dijkhoff. 1989. On the so-called infinitives in Atlantic Creoles. Lingua 77(3-4). 297–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko. 2001. The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Language evolution: Contact, competition and change. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. 2015. Introducing sociolinguistics, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunes, José. 1945. Compêndio de Gramática Histórica Portuguesa. Lisboa: Livraria Clásica Editora.Google Scholar
Obata, Miki & Samuel Epstein. 2015. Eliminating parameters from the narrow syntax: Rule ordering variation by third factor underspecification.
. 2016. Eliminating parameters from the narrow syntax: Rule ordering variation by thirdfactor underspecification. In Advances in Biolinguistics: The Human Language Faculty and Its Biological Basis, 128–138. Taylor and Francis Inc. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obata, Miki, Samuel Epstein & Marlyse Baptista. 2015. Can crosslinguistically variant grammars be formally identical? Third factor under specification and the possible elimination of parameters of UG. Lingua 1561. 1–16 [online version first appeared in 2014]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, Fernão. 1536. A Gramática da Linguagem Portuguesa. Lisboa: Casa da Moeda. Reprinted in 1975.Google Scholar
Roeper, Thomas. 1999. Universal Bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2(3). 169–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schuchardt, Hugo. 1881. Anzeige von: C. Baissac, Étude sur le patois créole mauricien. F. Adolpho Coelho, Os dialectos romanicos ou neo-latinos na Africa, Asia e America. Zeitschrift für rom. Philologie 51. 580–581.Google Scholar
Teyssier, Paul. 1959. La Langue de Gil Vicente. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Yang, Charles. 2002. Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar