Cover not available
Part of
Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches
Edited by Peter Bakker, Finn Borchsenius, Carsten Levisen and Eeva M. Sippola
[Not in series 211] 2017
► pp. 5–33

Chapter 2
Key concepts in the history of creole studies

| Aarhus University

This chapter serves as a brief introduction to creole studies. It mostly deals with issues that are discussed in the book, but not exclusively. It starts with an introduction of terminology, and key terms are printed in CAPITALS. The second part presents a number of observations and claims that have been made more or less explicitly in creole literature. Some key sources are given, and arguments are discussed briefly. This background knowledge should enable the reader to interpret the subsequent chapters, and take an informed position on the basis of the results presented there. We end by discussing a number of issues that could become important in the future of creole studies.

Article outline
  • 2.1Introduction
  • 2.2Creole studies
  • 2.3Issues in creole studies
    • 2.3.1General characteristics
      • (1)Creoles are natural languages, just like any other language
      • (2)Creoles are the result of retention, loss, and reconstitution
      • (3)Creoles are alike, simple and mixed
      • (4)The definition of “creole language” is circular
    • 2.3.2Sociohistory of creoles and creolization
      • (5)It is impossible to distinguish creoles from non-creoles on the basis of the structure alone, without knowledge of the sociohistory of a language community
      • (6)Certain sociohistorical circumstances have an effect on language structure, and specific circumstances can lead to the emergence of creoles
      • (7)The ecology of each situation of each creolization event was different, and therefore requires extensive data collection from historical sources
      • (8)Creoles are created as an act of identity
      • (9)Creoles are or were spoken by suppressed populations
    • 2.3.3Development: Pidgin stage or not
      • (10)A creole does not emerge without a preceding pidginization stage
      • (11)Creoles emerge without a pidgin
      • (12)A creole is a nativized pidgin
    • 2.3.4Influences from input languages
      • (13)A creole language is a structural continuation of an imported or indigenous language, where only the word forms have been replaced by words from another (mostly European) language
      • (14)Creoles are natural continuations of the lexifiers, which developed just like for example Latin developed into Italian or Spanish
      • (15)In the case of creoles, transmission of the language from parents to children was broken at one point in time
      • (16)Creoles are the result of a combination of features from several languages, notably the lexifier and its vernaculars, and different indigenous or transplanted languages
      • (17)Creoles show no structural traits from the indigenous or transplanted languages, and hence no substrate influence at all
    • 2.3.5Complexity of Creoles
      • (18)Creoles are, as a group, less complex than non-creoles
      • (19)Some creoles are more complex than their lexifiers
    • 2.3.6Creators of creoles
      • (20)Creoles are created by children
      • (21)Creoles are created by adults
      • (22)Creoles are created by adolescents
    • 2.3.7Gradual or quick
      • (23)Creoles develop slowly, over several generations
      • (24)Creoles develop quickly, within one generation
      • (25)Creoles show grammaticalization paths at an accelerated pace
    • 2.3.8Location
      • (26)(Some) creoles developed on plantations
      • (27)Creoles developed in urban settings
      • (28)Some creoles developed in other settings: forts, mission stations and maroon societies
    • 2.3.9Reasons for perceived similarities
      • (29)The structures of creoles are similar because their substrate languages show similarities
      • (30)The innovations in creoles reflect pragmatic aspects of language, i.e. language use
      • (31)The structures of creoles reflect the more deeply engrained properties of the human brain through a bioprogram
      • (32)The innovations in creoles reflect cognitive aspects of human communication, e.g. through saliency of meanings
    • 2.3.10Semantics
      • (33)Word meanings in creoles often deviate from the cognates in the lexifier because of influence from other languages
  • 2.4Research on creole languages and the contributions to this book
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 31 May 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.211.02bak
References
Aboh, E. O.
2009 Competition and selection. That’s all! In Aboh & Smith (eds), 317–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 The Emergence of Hybrid Grammars. Language Contact and Change [Cambridge Approaches to Language Contact]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aboh, E.
2016 Creole distinctiveness: A dead end. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 31(2): 400–418. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aboh, E. O. & Ansaldo, U.
2007 The role of typology in language creation: A descriptive take. In Ansaldo, Matthews & Lim (eds), 39–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aboh, E. O. & Smith, N. S. H.
(eds) 2009 Complex Processes in New Languages [Creole Language Library 35]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Non-iconic reduplications in eastern Gbe and Surinam. In Surviving the Middle Passage. The West Africa-Surinam Sprachbund, P. C. Muysken & N. S. H. Smith (eds), 241–260. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ansaldo U. & Matthews, S.
2001 Typical creoles and simple languages: The case of Sinitic. Linguistic Typology 5(2–3): 311–325.Google Scholar
2007 Deconstructing creole: The rationale. In Ansaldo, Matthews & Lim (eds), 39–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ansaldo, U., Matthews, S. & Lim, L.
(eds) 2007 Deconstructing Creole [Typological Studies in Language 73]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arends, J.
1989 Syntactic Developments in Sranan: Creolization as a Gradual Process. PhD dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
1993 Towards a gradualist model of creolisation. In Atlantic Meets Pacific: A Global View of Pidginization and Creolisation [Creole Language Library 11], F. Byrne & J. Holm (eds), 371–380. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2001 Simple grammars, complex languages. Linguistic Typology 5(2–3): 180–182.Google Scholar
Arends, Jacques & Perl, Matthias
(eds) 1995 Early Suriname Creole Texts. A Collection of 18th-century Sranan and Saramaccan Documents [Bibliotheca Ibero- Americana 49]. Frankfurt: Vervuert.Google Scholar
Baker, P.
1990 Off target? Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 5(1): 107–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1993 Australian influence on Melanesian Pidgin English. Te Reo 36: 3–67.Google Scholar
2001 No creolisation without prior pidginisation. Te Reo 44: 31–50.Google Scholar
Baker, P. & Huber, M.
2001 Atlantic, Pacific, and world-wide features in English-lexicon contact languages. English World-Wide 22(2): 157–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, P. & Fon Sing, G.
(eds) 2007 The Making of Mauritian Creole: Analyses Diachroniques a Partir Des Texts Anciens. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Baker, P. & Mühlhäusler, P.
2013 The creole legacy of a bounteous mutineer: Edward Young’s Caribbean contribution to the language of Pitcairn and Norfolk Islands. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 45(2): 170–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakker, P.
1987 Autonomous Languages. Signed and Spoken Languages Created by Children in the light of Bickerton’s Bioprogram Hypothesis [Publikaties van het Instituut voor Algemene Taalwetenschap 53]. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
2003 Pidgin inflectional morphology and its implications for creole morphology. Yearbook of Morphology 2002: 3–33. Special section on Pidgins and Creoles, Ingo Plag (ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
2008 Pidgins versus creoles and pidgincreoles. In The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, S. Kouwenberg & J. V. Singler (eds),130–157. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2014a Creolistics: Back to square one? Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 29(1): 177–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014b Three Dutch creoles in comparison. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 26(3): 191–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 You’ve got Gungbe, but we’ve got the numbers: Feature pools show that creoles are still typologically distinct. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 31(2): 419–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartens, A. & Baker, P.
(eds) 2012 Black Through White: African Words and Calques which Survived Slavery in Creoles and Transplanted European Languages. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Becker, A. & Veenstra, T.
2003 The survival of inflectional morphology in French-related creoles: The role of SLA processes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25: 283–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, D.
1981 Roots of Language. Ann Arbor MI: Karoma. Reprinted 2016, Language Science Press.Google Scholar
1984 The Language Bioprogram Hypothesis. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7(2): 173–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986 Creoles and West African languages: A case of mistaken identity? In Substrata versus Universals in Creole Genesis [Creole Language Library 1], P. Muysken & N. Smith (eds), 25–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988 Creole languages and the bioprogram. In Linguistic Theory: Extensions and Implications [Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, Vol. 2], F. Newmeyer (ed.), 268–84. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
1991 On the supposed “gradualness” of creole development. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 6: 25–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bøegh, K. F., Daval-Markussen A. & Bakker P.
2016 A phylogenetic analysis of stable structural features in West African languages. Studies in African Linguistics 45(1–2): 61–94.Google Scholar
Bollée, A.
1977 Le créole Français des Seychelles. Esquisse d’une grammaire – textes – vocabulaire. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruyn, A.
2011 Grammaticalization in creoles. Ordinary and not-so-ordinary cases. In Language Change in Contact Languages: Grammatical and Prosodic Considerations [Benjamins Current Topics 36], J. C. Clements & S. Gooden (eds). 53–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cabral, A. S.
1995 Contact-induced Language Change in the Western Amazon: The Non-genetic Origin of the Kokama Language. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Chaudenson, R.
1978 Les créoles français. Paris: Nathan.Google Scholar
1992 Des îles, des hommes, des langues: Essais sur la créolisation linguistique et culturelle. Paris: L’Harmattan. Revised, English edition 2001, Creolization of Language and Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Clements, J. C.
1992 Foreigner talk and the origins of pidgin Portuguese. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 7(1): 75–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corum, M.
2015 Substrate and Adstrate. The Origins of Spatial Semantics in West African Pidgincreoles [Language Contact and Bilingualism 10]. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Ö.
2004 The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity [Studies in Language Companion Series 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Ö. & Velupillai, V.
2013 The past tense. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL] (2 November 2014).
De Mulder, W. & Carlier, A.
2011 The grammaticalization of definite articles. In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, B. Heine & H. Narrog (eds). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeGraff, M.
2001 Morphology in creole genesis: Linguistics and ideology. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, M. Kenstowicz (ed.), 53–122. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2003 Against creole exceptionalism. Language 79(2): 391–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005a Do creole languages constitute an exceptional typological class? Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée 10(1): 11–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005b Linguists’ most dangerous myth. The fallacy of creole exceptionalism. Language in Society 34(4): 533–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Creole exceptionalism and the (mis)education of the Creole speaker. In The Languages of Africa and the Diaspora: Educating for Language Awareness, J. A. Kleifgen & G. Bond (eds), 124–144. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Delancey, S.
2014 Creolization in the divergence of Tibeto-Burman languages. In Trans-Himalayan Linguistics: Historical and Descriptive Linguistics of the Himalayan Area, T. Owen-Smith & N. Hill (eds), 41–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Dryer, M. S.
2013 Prefixing vs. suffixing in inflectional morphology. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL] (2 November 2014).
Ehrhart, S. & Revis. M.
2013 Tayo. In Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online, S. M. Michaelis, P. Maurer, M. Haspelmath & M. Huber (eds), 271–281. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Faraclas, N. & Klein, T. B.
(eds) 2009 Simplicity and Complexity in Creoles and Pidgins. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A.
1971 Absence of copula and the notion of simplicity: A study of normal speech, baby talk, foreigner talk and pidgins. In Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, D. Hymes (ed.), 141–150. Cambridge: CUPGoogle Scholar
Givón, T.
1973 Prolegomena to any sane creology. In Readings in Creole Studies, I. F. Hancock, E. Polomé, M. Goodman & B. Heine (eds), 3–35. Ghent: Story Scientia.Google Scholar
1981 On the development of the numeral ‘one’ as an indefinite marker. Folia Linguistica Historica 2(1): 35–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1982 Tense- aspect-modality: The Creole prototype and beyond. In Tense – Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics [Typological Studies in Language 1], Paul Hopper (ed.), 115–163. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H.
1966 Synchronic and diachronic universals in phonology. Language 42: 508–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, A.
2009 Admixture, structural transmission, simplicity and complexity. In Simplicity and Complexity in Creoles and Pidgins, N. Faraclas & T. Klein (eds), 125–152. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
2013a Occurrence of nominal plurality. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL]> (2 November 2014).
2013b Is creole distinctiveness what we want to know about? [URL] (16 June 2015).
Hay, J. & Bauer L.
2007 Phoneme inventory size and population size. Language 83(2): 388–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hazaël-Massieux., M.-C.
2008 Textes anciens en créole français de la Caraïbe. Histoire et analyse. Paris: Publibook.Google Scholar
Heine, B.
1997 Indefinite articles. In Cognitive Foundations of Grammar, Ch. 4, 66–82. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Holm, J.
1988 Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. I: Theory and Structure. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2003 Languages in Contact: The Partial Restructuring of Vernaculars. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, B.
2012 Origins of a Creole: The History of Papiamentu and its African Ties. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jourdan, C.
1989 Nativization and anglicization in Solomon Islands Pijin. World Englishes 8(1): 25–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 Pidgins and creoles: The blurring of categories. Annual Review of Anthropology 20: 187–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kießling, R. & Mous, M.
2004 Urban youth languages in Africa. Anthropological Linguistics 46(3): 303–341.Google Scholar
Krämer, P.
2013: Vom Instinkt zum Bioprogramm, von der Mischung zum Hybrid. Historische und gegenwärtige Vorstellungen von Kreolisierung als Wandelprozess in der Sprache. In Kreolisierung revisited. Debatten um ein weltweites Kulturkonzept, G. Müller & N. Ueckmann (eds), 43–63. Bielefeld: transcript. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Ausgewählte Arbeiten der Kreolistik des 19. Jahrhunderts / Selected Works from 19th Century Creolistics. Emilio Teza, Thomas Russell, Erik Pontoppidan, Adolpho Coelho [Kreolische Bibliothek 24]. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Kusters, W.
2003 Linguistic Complexity. The Influence of Social Change on Verbal Inflection. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Kuteva, T. & Comrie, B.
2012 The evolution of language and elaborateness of grammar: the case of relative clauses in creole languages. In Relative Clauses in Languages of the Americas: A Typological Overview [Typological Studies in Language 102], B. Comrie & Z. Estrada-Fernández (eds), 27–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, C.
1998 Creole Genesis and the Acquisition of Grammar: The Case of Haitian Creole. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2011 Creoles, their Substrates, and Language Typology [Typological Studies in Language 95]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Relabeling in Language Genesis. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LePage, R. B. & Tabouret-Keller, A.
1985 Acts of Identity: Creole-based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Lupyan, G. & Dale, R. A.
2010 Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE: 5(1): e8559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magens, J. M.
1770 Grammatica over det Creolske Sprog, som bruges paa de trende Danske Eilande, St. Croix, St. Thomas og St. Jan i America. Copenhagen: Kongelige Wäysenhusets Bogtrykkerie.Google Scholar
Mather, P.-A.
2007 Creole studies. In French Applied Linguistics [Language Learning & Language Teaching 16], D. Ayoun (ed.), 401–424. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, J. H.
1995 Sisters under the skin. A case for genetic relationship between the Atlantic English-based creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 10(2): 289–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 The Afrogenesis hypothesis of plantation creole origin. In Spreading the Word: The Issue of Diffusion among the Atlantic Creoles, M. Huber & M. Parkvall (eds), 111–152. London: University of Westminster.Google Scholar
2001 The world’s simplest grammars are creole Grammars. Linguistic Typology 5(2–3): 125–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Defining Creole. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2012 Case closed? Testing the feature pool hypothesis. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 27(1): 171–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meijer, G. & Muysken, P.
1977 On the beginnings of pidgin and creole studies: Schuchardt and Hesseling. In Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, A. Valdman (ed.), 21–45. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Michaelis, S.
(ed.) 2008 Roots of Creole Structures. Weighing the Contribution of Substrates and Superstrates [Creole Language Library 33]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, M., Sinnemäki, K. & Karlsson, F.
(eds) 2009 Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change [Studies in Language Companion Series 94]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S.
1996 The Founder Principle in creole genesis. Diachronica 13(1): 83–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 Creolization is a social, not a structural, process. In Degrees of Restructuring in Creole Languages [Creole Language Library 22], I. Neumann-Holzschuh & E. W. Schneider (eds), 65–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2001 The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 Competition and selection in language evolution. Selection 3(1): 45–56 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Language Evolution: Contact, Competition and Change. London: Continuum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Second language acquisition and the emergence of creoles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32: 1–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, P.
1979 Growth and Structure of the Lexicon of New Guinea Pidgin. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
1997 Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Muysken, P. C.
1988 Are creoles a special type of language? In Linguistic Theory: Extensions and Implications [Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, Vol. 2], F. Newmeyer (ed.), 285–301. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, P. C. & Smith, N. S. H.
1986 Substrata versus Universals in Creole Genesis [Creole Language Library 1]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, P. C., Smith, N. S. H. & Borges, R. D.
(eds) 2015 Surviving the Middle Passage. The West Africa-Surinam Sprachbund. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkvall, M.
2000 Out of Africa. African Influences in Atlantic Creoles. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
2008 The simplicity of creoles in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Miestamo, Sinnemäki & Karlsson (eds), 265–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkvall, M. & Bakker, P.
2013 Pidgins. In Contact Languages, P. Bakker & Y. Matras (eds), 15–64. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, I.
2002 On the role of grammaticalization in creolization. In Pidgin and Creole Linguistics in the Twenty-first Century, G. G. Gilbert (ed.), 229–246. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2011 Creolization and admixture: Typology, feature pools, and second language acquisition. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 26(1): 89–110. Special issue Creoles and Typology, P. Bhatt & T. Veenstra (eds). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, S. J.
2005 The Emergence of Hawai’i Creole English in the Early 20th Century: The Sociohistorical Context of Creole Genesis. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Roberts, S. J. & Bresnan, J.
2008 Retained inflectional morphology in pidgins: A typological study. Linguistic Typology 12: 269–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romaine, S.
1988 Pidgin and Creole Languages. London: Longman.Google Scholar
van Rossem, C. & van der Voort, H.
1996 Die Creol Taal. 250 Years of Negerhollands Texts. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sampson, G, Gil, D. & Trudgill, P.
(eds) 2009 Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. & Laberge, S.
1974 On the acquisition of native speakers by a language. In Pidgins and Creoles: Current Trends and Prospects, D. DeCamp & I. F. Hancock (eds), 73–84. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Shnukal, A. & Marchese, L.
1983 Creolization of Nigerian Pidgin English: A progress report. English World-Wide 4: 17–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shosted, R.
2006 Correlating complexity: A typological approach. Linguistic Typology 10: 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, I.
2012 Measuring substrate influence. Word order features in Ibero-Asian Creoles. In Ibero-Asian Creoles: Comparative Perspectives [Creole Language Library 46], H. C. Cardoso, A. N. Baxter & M. Pinharanda Nunes (eds), 125–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. S. H.
1987 The Genesis of the Creole Languages of Surinam. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Speedy, K.
2013 Reflections on creole genesis in New Caledonia. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 45(2): 187–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, D. R.
1971 Grammatical and lexical affinities of creoles. In Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, D. Hymes (ed.), 293–296. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G.
2001 Language Contact: An Introduction. Edinburgh: EUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomason, S. & Kaufman, T.
1988 Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, P.
2009 Sociolinguistic typology and complexification. In Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, 97–108, G. Sampson, D. Gil & P. Trudgill (eds). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2011 Sociolinguistic Typology: Social Determinants of Linguistic Complexity. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Velupillai, V.
2012 An Introduction to Linguistic Typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Volker, C.
1982 An Introduction to Rabaul Creole German (Unserdeutsch). MA thesis, University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Whinnom, K.
1965 The origin of the European-based creoles and pidgins. Orbis 14: 509–527Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Agostinho, Ana Lívia
2023. Word prosody of African versus European-origin words in Afro-European creoles. Linguistic Typology 27:2 ► pp. 481 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 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.