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. 345–368

Chapter 15
The semantics of Englishes and Creoles

Pacific and Australian perspectives

| Roskilde University, Aarhus University
| Australian National University, Griffith University
| University of Western Sydney
| Aarhus University
This chapter provides a lexical-semantic comparison of a selection of Englishes and English-related creoles in the Australia-Pacific area. Faced with the conundrum in sociolinguistic classificatory practice and its contested categories: “language”, “creole”, “dialect”, “variety”, and “English(es)”, we will attempt to circumvent the problematic of metavocabulary by taking a new, two-pronged approach. Firstly, we rely on semantic primes, simple words meanings such as I, you, people, body, big, small, know, think, see, hear as our comparandum, and compare and contrast the lexicalizations of these basic meanings across our sample. Secondly, we utilize phylogenetic networks for visualizing our results and as a tool for forming new hypotheses. Our results provide counter-evidence to the claim that Melanesian and Australian creoles are “varieties of English”. In our sample, we find three basic types of relations. “Shared-core” types (Australian English v. New Zealand English); “closely related core” types (Hawai’i Creole v. Anglo Englishes); and “distantly related core” types (Tok Pisin v. Anglo English, Kriol v. Anglo English, or Yumplatok v. Anglo English). We measure our results against Scandinavian languages in order to explore the language-dialect question, and against Trinidadian – a Caribbean creole, in order to explore the extent of lexical-semantic areality. We conclude that current sociolinguistic metavocabulary is inadequate for representing the complexity of the new ways of speaking in the Australia-Pacific region, and we suggest a principled areal-semantic investigation of words based on semantic principles.
Keywords: Creole semantics, semantics of Englishes, areal semantics, language ideology, sociolinguistic classification
Article outline
  • 15.1Introduction
  • 15.2The “language” concept and its critics
  • 15.3Words and coding
  • 15.4Results
    • 15.4.1The Australia-Pacific Network
    • 15.4.2A case study in ‘people’
  • 15.5Discussion
  • 15.6Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • 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.211.15lev
References (89)
References
Alleyne, M. C. 2014. A reformist approach to the “Creole” concept. Keynote address at the 20th Biennial Conference of the Society for Caribbean Linguistics, in conjunction with the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics (SPCL) and the Associação de Crioulos de Base Lexical Portuguesea e Espanhola (ACBLPE), Holiday Inn Resort, Aruba, 5–8. August.Google Scholar
Ansaldo, U., Matthews, S. & Lim, L. (eds). 2007. Deconstructing Creole [Typological Studies in Language 73]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bailey, C.-J. 1971. Trying to talk in the new paradigm. Working papers in Linguistics, University of Hawai’i at Manoa 4(2): 312–339.Google Scholar
Bakker, P., Daval-Markussen, A., Parkvall, M. & Plag. I. 2011. Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 26 (1): 5–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barker, F. & Lee, L. 1985. Waskia Dikseneri: Waskia, Tok Pisin, English. Ukarumpa, PNG: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Beimers, G. 2009. A Grammar of Solomon Islands Pijin. PhD dissertation, The University of New England, Armidale.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. 2013. Ethnography, Superdiversity, and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J. & Rampton, B. 2011. Language and superdiversity. Diversities 13(2): 1–21.Google Scholar
Burridge, C. & Mulder, J. 1998. English in Australia and New Zealand: An Introduction to its History, Structure and Use. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, S. A. 2013. Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chaudenson, R. 2001. Creolization of Language and Culture. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crowley, T. 1990. Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The Emergence of a National Language in Vanuatu. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Devette-Chee, K. 2011. Decreolization of Tok Pisin: Is there a Tok Pisin- to-English Continuum? Journal of the Linguistic Society of Papua New Guinea 29: 95–103.Google Scholar
Eades, D. 2013. Aboriginal Ways of Using English. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 2009. Language and Identity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Sociolinguistics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Franklin, K. & Yapua, K. 2009. A Tok Pisin and West Kewa Common Usage Diglot Dictionary (Tok Pisin na Tok Kewa Dikseneri / Pisini Agaapara Adda Agaa Laapo I Buku). Ukarumpa, PNG: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Goddard, C. 2009. The ‘communication concept’ and the ‘language concept’ in everyday English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 29(1): 11–25. Special issue Conceptualising Communication in Linguistics, M. Haugh & A. J. Liddicoat (eds). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. Semantic Analysis – A Practical Introduction, revised 2nd edn. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Goddard, C. & Wierzbicka, A. (eds). 2002. Meaning and Universal Grammar – Theory and Empirical Findings, Vols. 1–2 [Studies in Language Companion Series 60–61]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2014. Words and Meanings: Lexical Semantics Across Domains, Languages, and Cultures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hagen, B. 1903. Vospominaniia o N. N. Miklukhe-Maklae u zhitelei bukhty Astroliabiia na Novoi Gvinee (Recollections of inhabitants of Astrolabe Bay in New Guinea about N. N. Miklouho-Maclay). Zemlevedenie 2–3: 245–252.Google Scholar
Hall, R. A. Jr. 1943. Melanesian Pidgin Phrase-Book and Vocabulary: With Grammatical Introduction. Baltimore MD: Waverly Press.Google Scholar
Hay, J., Maclagan, M. & Gordon, E. 2008. New Zealand English. Edinburgh: EUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holm, J. A. 1988. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. 1: Theory and Structure; Vol. II: Reference Survey. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2000. An Introduction of Pidgin and Creoles. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jourdan, C. 2002. Pijin: A Trilingual Dictionary. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
2008. The cultural in pidgin genesis. In The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, S. Kouwenberg & J. V. Singler (eds), 359–381. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, J. N. 2008. Polylingual languaging around and among children and adolescents. International Journal of Multilingualism 5(3): 161–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. 1992. World Englishes: Approaches, Issues and Resources. Language Teaching 25: 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanas, J. 2001. Tu Kaen Bislama: Wan lukluk long nasonal langwis blong Vanuatu blong soem se i gat tu kaen Bislama we oli toktok long hem long Vila Taon. MA thesis, Vila: Yunivesiti Blong Saot Pasifik.Google Scholar
Keesing, R. M. 1988. Melanesian Pidgin and the Oceanic Substrate. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A. 2007. World Englishes: Implications for International Communication and English Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Kortmann, B. & Schneider, E. 2008. General Introduction. In Varieties of English: The Pacific and Australasia, Vol. 3, K. Burridge & B. Kortmann (eds), 1–8. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, C. 2004. Issues in the Study of Pidgin and Creole Languages [Studies in Language Companion Series 70]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 2011. Creoles, their Substrates, and Language Typology [Typological Studies in Language 95]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015. Relabeling in Language Genesis. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Levisen, C. 2012. Cultural Semantics and Social Cognition: A Case Study on the Danish Universe of Meaning. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. Postcolonial lexicography: Defining creole emotion words with the Natural Semantic Metalanguage. Cahiers de Lexicologie 2, Special issue Lexical Definition, A. Polguère & D. Sikora (eds) 35–60.Google Scholar
2017. The social and sonic semantics of reggae: Language ideology and emergent socialities in postcolonial Vanuatu. Language and Communicaton 52. Special issue Language Ideologies and Music in Contact Situations, B. Schneider, E. Sippola & C. Levisen (eds) 102–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C. & Jogie, M. R. 2015. The Trinidadian “Theory of Mind”: Personhood and postcolonial semantics. International Journal of Language and Culture 2(2): 169–193. Special issue Language and Cultural Values. Adventures in Applied Ethnolinguistics, B. Peeters (ed.). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levisen, C. & Priestley, C. 2017. Social keywords in postcolonial Melanesian discourse: kastom ‘traditional culture’ and tumbuna ‘ancestors’. In Cultural Keywords in Discourse, C. Levisen & S. Waters (eds). 83–106.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Makoni, S. & Pennycook, A. 2007. Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 1998. Identifying the creole prototype: Vindicating a typological class. Language 74(4): 788–818. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. Defining Creole. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Meakins, F. 2013. Gurindji Kriol structure dataset. In Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online. S. M. Michaelis, P. Maurer, M. Haspelmath & M. Huber (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, R. & Bhatt, R. M. 2008. World Englishes: The Study of New Linguistic Varieties. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mihalic. F. 1971. The Jacaranda Dictionary and Grammar of Melanesian Pidgin. Milton, Queensland: Jacaranda.Google Scholar
Moore, B. 2008. Speaking our Language: The Story of Australian English. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, P. 1982a. Etymology and pidgin and creole languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 80(1): 99–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1982b. Language and communicative efficiency: The case of Tok Pisin. Language and Communication 2(2): 105–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, P., Dutton, T. E. & Romaine, S. (eds). 2003. Tok Pisin Texts: From the Beginning to the Present [Varieties of English around the World T9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, P. & Nash, J. 2012. Norfolk Island: History, People, Environment, Language. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Munro, J. 2011. Roper River Aboriginal language features in Australian Kriol. In Lefebvre (ed.), 461–487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicholls, S. 2013. Cultural scripts, social cognition and social interaction in Roper Kriol. Australian Journal of Linguistics 33: 282–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, A., Drew, D. E., Banala, N., Mattocks, R. & Mattocks, J. 2005. Kamano-Kafe’ Kemofo Agafa’e Dictionary for Kamano-kafe’ English Tok Pisin. Ukarumpa, PNG: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Pedersen, I. L. 2003. Traditional dialects of Danish and the de-dialectalization 1900–2000. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 159: 9–28.Google Scholar
Peeters, B. (ed.). 2006. Semantic Primes and Universal Grammar: Empirical Evidence from the Romance Languages [Studies in Language Companion Series 81]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pennycook, A. 2006. Global Englishes and Transcultural Flows. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Language as a Local Practice. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pennycook, A. & Otsuji, E. 2015. Metrolingualism: Language in the City. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Priestley, C. 2009. A grammar of Koromu (Kesawai) a Trans New Guinea language of Papua New Guinea. PhD dissertation, The Australian National University, Canberra.Google Scholar
Forthcoming. Koromu: A Papuan Language of Kesawai and Nearby Villages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Romaine, S. 2000. Language in Society. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Sakoda, K. & Siegel, J. 2003. Pidgin Grammar‬: An Introduction to the Creole English of hawai’i. Honolulu HI: Bess Press.Google Scholar
Sandefur, J. 1979. An Australian Creole in the Northern Territory: A Description of Ngukurr-Bamyili Dialects, Part1. Work Papers of SIL-AAB, Vol. 3. Darwin: Summer Institute of Linguists.Google Scholar
Schneider, E. W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schuchardt, H. 1883. Ueber das Melaneso-Englische. Kreolische Studien V. Wien: In Commission bei Carl Gerold’s Sohn.Google Scholar
Schultze-Berndt, E., Meakins, F. & Angelo, D. 2013. Kriol. In English-Based and Dutch-Based Languages, S. M. Michaelis, P. Maurer, M. Haspelmath & M. Huber (eds), 241–251. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Sharifian, F. 2006. A cultural-conceptual approach and world Englishes: The case of Aboriginal English. World Englishes 25(1): 11–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shnukal, A. 1988. Broken: An Introduction to the Creole Language of Torres Strait. Canberra: Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Sebba, M. 1997. Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles. London: Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siegel, J. 2008. The Emergence of Pidgin and Creole Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Singler, J. V. 1990. Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect-Systems [Creole Language Library 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. P. 2003. Growing Up with Tok Pisin: Contact, Creolization, and Change in Papua New Guinea’s National Language. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B. 2014. The Languages of the Jews: A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stewart, W. A. 1965. Urban negro speech. Sociolinguistic factors affecting English teaching. In Social Dialects and Language Learning. Proceedings of the Bloomington, Indiana, Conference, 1964, R. W. Shuy (ed.), 10–18. Champaign IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
Sterzuk, A. 2011. The Struggle for Legitimacy: Indigenized Englishes in Settler Schools. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G. 2001. Language Contact: An Introduction. Edinburgh: EUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomas, S. 2004. Yaame (tambu). In C. Priestley. Unpublished data files on the Koromu language.Google Scholar
Troy, J. F. 1994. Melaleuka: A History and Description of New South Wales Pidgin, 2 Vols. PhD dissertation, Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Tryon, D. T. 1987. Bislama: An Introduction to the National Language of Vanuatu. Canberra: Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Tryon, D. & Charpentier, J.-M. (eds). 2004. Pacific Pidgins and Creoles: Origins, Growth and Development. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandeputte-Tavo, L. 2013. New technologies and language shifting in Vanuatu. Pragmatics 23(1): 171–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Velupillai, V. 2003. Hawai’i Creole English. A typological Analysis of the Tense-Mood-Aspect System. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
2015. Pidgins, Creoles and Mixed Languages: An Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. 2013. Imprisoned in English: The Hazards of English as a Default Language. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zipp, L. 2014. Educated Fiji English: Lexico-grammar and Variety Status [Varieties of English around the World G47]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Stefanovic, Tamara, Ana Kazanegra-Velickovic & Neda Nikolic
2022. Language Competences amidst Corporatization, Digital Technologies, and Learning English for Specific Purposes. Studies in Linguistics, Culture, and FLT 10:1 ► pp. 62 ff. DOI logo
Hill, Deborah
2020. From Expensive English to Minimal English. In Studies in Ethnopragmatics, Cultural Semantics, and Intercultural Communication, ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Levisen, Carsten
2020. Postcolonial Prepositions: Semantics and Popular Geopolitics in the Danosphere. In Studies in Ethnopragmatics, Cultural Semantics, and Intercultural Communication, ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Levisen, Carsten
2021. Pæn, flot, dejlig, andlækker. International Journal of Language and Culture 8:1 ► pp. 14 ff. DOI logo
Kornacki, Paweł
2019. A Look at Tok Pisin save: A Lexical Verb and an Aspectual Marker in a Cultural Context. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies :28/2 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Levisen, Carsten & Sophia Waters
2017. Chapter 1. How words do things with people. In Cultural Keywords in Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 277], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 september 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.