The Concept of Pidgin and Creole
The Concept of Pidgin and Creole
The Concept of Pidgin and Creole
Abstract: This work is mainly looking at the origin of both pidgin and creole, because there are lotsof
arguments on where they are originated from. It can trace back to whether the contact between languages in
Africa or the communication between slaves and their masters in Caribbean. To clear such arguments we
brought theories that looked at them (pidgin and creole) in different angles, and we have suggested our thought
about it.
Keywords: pidgin, creole, definition, and origin
I.
General Introduction
Language is just like a chain that has been transmitted from one generation to another without
separation. In the normal situation, the present generation should inherit language from their ancestors,
sometimes with some minor changes, but in the case of language transfer there will be a major change, and this
change will lead to emerge of new language, but it is gradually, it takes centuries or even millennia before its
actualization. There are two ways Bickerton (1984) suggested in which language come into existence: one is
through catastrophic way and the other is gradually. The latter is the more usual way, but the former is the
carrying vital information on the nature of language in general.
What the discussion above is saying, issue of language in general, lets go further and narrow ourselves
to the focus area which is pidgin and creole languages. Lets look at their definitions separately for more
clarification:
II.
Definition of Pidgin
Pidgin is a type of simplified language which came into existence as a result of contact between two or
more languages in order to find a means of communication, according to (Wikipedia). This situation mostly
occurs in trade, plantation and colonization. Pidgin is said to be language with simplified syntax, word order etc.
because it is constructed in an unplanned way, or it is given birth or been developed by unintelligible languages,
Bickerton (1984). Its not all simplified languages are pidgin. It is not a native to anyone but learnt as a second
language by many. Other definitions are: Pidgin and creole are emerged languages in need of communication
among people who dont have single language to use e.g. among plantation labourers who came from different
geographic origins, Jeff (2008). Pidgin is a language system that developed among people that dont have
common language to share, it is a language of contact situation where there is no common language to use. Todd
(1974 pp. 1) defined pidgin as A pidgin is a marginal language which arises to fulfil certain restricted
communication needs among people who have no common language. This definition seems to Rickford
(1977a) as unsatisfied and there is a disagreement with the definition. This disagreement came when Rickford
reviewed Todds paper and saying that though it is satisfied to many linguists and scholars, but there are lot of
difficulties with the definition because it focused only on the social and communicative role of the languages
rather than their linguistic characteristics.
When you critically examine the definition of pidgin, there are two things involved: one is the
circumstances in which it has been developed (i.e. the contact situation). Secondly, the purpose of its
development is to have a common language among the contact people. It is obvious to say that the contact
condition brought pidgin into existence and the purpose of having common language among people that keeping
or maintaining its existence.
Definition of Creole
A creole is a naturalized stable language that came into existence through mixed parent languages,
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creole_language ). It is a language that developed or derived from
pidgin. When a language has its origin from an extended between more communities, one of which is European
language then it is called a creole. Creole integrates characteristics from the all the parent languages to establish
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
14 | Page
III.
Similarities
Both languages are naturally arising in a contact situation due to lack of common language to share
among group of people, and serve the purpose of lingua franca (language of wider communication). Though to
some extent pidgin and lingua franca are the same, just like the way Wardhaugh defined pidgin as Pidgin and
creole are arise from a basic need that people who speak different languages have to find a common system of
communication. Such a common system is often called a lingua franca. To strengthen this view, Wardhaugh
referred to the definition of lingua franca by UNESCO in 1953. a language which is used habitually by people
whose mother tongues are different in order to facilitate communication between them (pp. 56). But the reason
for saying serve as a lingua franca is that, it can be spread and use by other communities not necessarily only by
the people who were involved in the contact situation, while at the initial stage of pidgin it is restricted to only
those who were involved in the contact situation. Onuigbo (1999: 200) claims that What began originally as a
trade language gradually grew into a compromise language for wider communication. Creole is derived from
pidgin but the pidgin is a secondary language which developed by speakers of unintelligible languages in a
contact situation for the purpose of communication, Bickerton (1984). But Mufwene (2001) has a different view
in which he claims that pidgin and creole arise individualistically under different conditions, and it is not
necessary for a creole to be preceded by a pidgin or a creole to develop from a pidgin. Pidgin is fully adequate
(adequate in the sense that able to fulfil the need for communication among the people of different languages)
language, it is derived from the process of pidginization, and it is evolved from trade, colonization and
plantation areas,that involves many languages but no one is predominant, and creole often evolve from pidgin,
through the creolization or nativization process. Creole is developed out of pidgin (pidgin is the antecedent of
creole). Todd (1974) referred to the two languages as Popularly, they are thought to be inferior, haphazard,
broken, bastardized version of older, longer established language pp. 1
Differences
Pidgin has no native speakers while creole has native speakers, the former is created by adults, but the
latter is invented by children. Linguistically, Pidgins form and grammar is simplified and reduced, sometimes
can even die out, but creole is a stable and developed into full-fledged complete and adequate natural language.
Creoleoften exists in post-colonial areasand it is used as a daily vernacular, while pidgin mostly exists in
colonial period (i.e. the European based pidgins, not that we dont have pidgins presently, there are lot of
pidgins existing today), and some in pre-colonial time and its usage is restricted. Creole has less or elaborated
grammatical structures in grammar than older languages do i.e. it can be standardized or not, but definitely more
than pidgin.It has much variation but coherent sociolinguistic norms (of evaluation/integration), has wider
domains and are used more for expressive, and Pidgin is a product of incomplete second language acquisition,
and it has small core vocabularies and borrowed extensively outside.It has a little system but surface grammar
with much variation.Pidgins in general having a simplified linguistic structure which include all aspect of
grammars when compare them with their lexifiers. These aspects are in terms of semantics, syntax, morphology,
lexicon and phonology. Sebba (1997) labels the reduced structural system into four structures in attribution to
pidgin grammar. According to his suggestion some of them are also usable for creoles:
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
15 | Page
IV.
Pidgins came into existence through colonization, plantation and/or trade. The languages that played
major role during such period were the ones responsible for the emergence of pidgin. Such languages were:
Spanish, French, Portuguese, English and Dutch. There are some terms in relation to pidgin and creole. These
terms are: superstrate, substrate and adstrate. The major language in which pidgins are based and has large
number of vocabularies (dominant language) is called superstrate. Minority languages that contributed less in
terms of vocabularies (subordinate language) are the substrate. Language that is neither dominant nor
subordinate, mostly come into pidgin after the initial contact has taken place. For example, English language is
the superstrate in case of Nigerian Pidgin English and Papua New Guineas Creole, while other minority
languages that were in contact during the pidginization are serving as substrate e.g. in the case of Nigeria, Benin
language, Igbo, Yoruba among others. The present languages in the area where pidgin is spoken and later their
vocabularies were borrowed into the pidgin are the adstrate. I will still give example with Nigerian situation,
Hausa language is adstrate because it was later that its vocabularies were borrowed into the pidgin.
The term pidgin has a number of opinions on where it was originated. There are lot of converses on the
term, but none is accepted by the community of academicians and linguists:
1) Pidgin (Pidian) means people in Southern American language called YayoKleinecke (1959) according to
a source
http://www.uni-due.de/SVE/VARS_PidginsAndCreoles.htm#origin . This kind of source cannot be
believed because this kind of form (Pidian) can be a name in the language e.g. Mapidian, Tarapidian etc.
and still claimed that it could be misspelling.
2) Ocupacao means occupation, trade or job in Portuguese. Portuguese were among the first European
traders that travelled to third world countries and encouraged the indigenous with their language, but it is
difficult to explain phonetically or morphosyntactically how the original word shift to pidgin form.
3) Chinese corruption of the word business. As the word is used for any action or occupation (cf. joss-pidgin
religion and chow-chow-pidgin cooking') It shouldnt be amazing that the word pidgin is been used for a
language variety which arose for trading purposes.
4) Pidjom meaning barter in Hebrew word. This opinion is stronger and accepted both phonetically and
semantically. On the distribution of a Jewish word outside of Europe and its acceptance as a general term
for a trade language.
5) The term is claimed to be derived from pequenoportugues, Hancock (1972). It is broken Portuguese
spoken by non-educated people in Angola. This opinion is somehow accepted semantically. If you look at
the word pequeno is used to refer to offspring, in this case a language derived from another.
Phonetically, the changes to /pidgin/ is not hard to explain: /peke:no/ > /pege:n/ > /pigin/ > /pidgin/
(however it is not being proved).
Muhlhausler (1986) has strengthened the history or the origin of the term pidgin, saying that all of the
above origins are genuine, basing his reason as, all are in agreement with the nature of pidgin languages.
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
16 | Page
V.
In the last hundred years there were several theories proposed by different initiators that explained the
origin of pidgin. These theories were classified into five groups, and they overlap with one another. Sometimes
there will be a possibility of mixture of origin, (pidgin and creole, theories of origin, and developmental stages).
There are several theories from different initiators backing issue of pidgin and creole languages which we are
going to look at them one by one. Looking at them should include the discussion of their problems. Todd (1974)
identified and listed four theories of pidgins and creoles with their developers, and we got additional one which
is the recent among the theories from Atlantic group:
1.
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
17 | Page
www.iosrjournals.org
18 | Page
Universalist theory
This theory is talking about the universal similarities of pidgin and creole in general, is the most recent
among all the theories. it claimed that similarities is the basic inclination among all humans to form languages of
similar category or systematic language with simple syntactic SVO with little or no reduction or other
complexities of sentence, with lexicon that makes maximum use of polysemy operating from limited
vocabulary, and devices use of reduplication, and simplified phonology.
This theory shared common features with the other theories. In a practical way, creole is predicted to
pristine value for linguistic limitations. For example With the parameter pro-drop, whereby the personal
pronoun is not obligatory with verb forms (cf. Italian capisco I understand'), the unmarked setting is for no prodrop to be allowed and indeed this is the situation in all pidgins and creoles (Atlantic Group). It is direct
oppose to independent and parallel theory because this one did not restrict itself to one side or particular section
of pidgin and creole. To me is the one that provided convincing points more than the other theories.
In support of the above theory, we brought this hypothesis to back it. It is called The language Bioprogram Hypothesis which was developed by Bickerton. The bio-program hypothesis is hypothesizing that
there is no doubt that the language (creole) is derived from pidgin, and their main idea is that the creole is been
invented by children using the biological program for language to transform the unstructured language (pidgin)
into a language with highly structured grammar. It is like responding to Chomskys view that they theorized
language on mental organ. Bickerton and his followers were suggesting that there is a particular part of human
cognitive dedicated to language. This is the best hypothesis that supports this theory because the other theories
did not account for this fact. The inventor suggested that, this hypothesis provided a view which makes the child
freely change into the target language.
Whatever arguments people have about the origin of both pidgin and creole, we assumed that pidgin
and creole were originated from the contact situation in Africa (languages contact that took place in Africa in
pre-colonial period, colonial period, and post-colonial period among people who tried to find a common
language for communication). You can apply any of these theories to this situation that we discussed above and
will still give you a positive result, in the sense that pidgin and creole were originated from Africa.
VI.
The developmental stages are categorized into four. These four categories usually appear in two
contexts where each context has a specific term for it. There are: social situation and linguistic correlation.
1
2
3
4
Social situation
Marginal contact
Nativization
Mother tongue development
Movement towards standard language
(not necessarily input language)
Linguistic correlation
Restricted pidgin
Extended pidgin
Creole
Decreolization
Pidgin and creole usually undergo these stages for their development to take place. Pidgin has a life-cycle and
generally agreed that it is characterised into restricted and extended, it is obvious that pidgin start as a restricted
variety of language which used in a contact situation for the purpose of trading.
Process of pidginization and creolization
When language is limitedly used only for the purpose of communication among natives of different
languages, then pidginization process normally begins. It is restricted and undergone simplification and
admixture. If a new language emerged as a stable variety in such procedure, it is called pidgin. Rickfor (1977)
claimed that pidginized modifications which went through difficulties and linguistics expansion process, then
the creole may be used for any new stable variety that results from this process, but Bickerton (1984) have
argued that there was no evidence which will show the expansion of creole. Pidgin emerged involving simple
structures often commands and little number of words strained from the language of the superstrate, Todd
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
19 | Page
References
[1].
[2].
[3].
[4].
[5].
[6].
[7].
[8].
[9].
[10].
[11].
[12].
[13].
[14].
[15].
Bickerton, Derek 1984 the language bioprogram hypothesis The Behavioural and Brain Sciences 1984 Vol. 7, pp 173-221
Bickerton, Derek. 1988 "Creole languages and the bioprogram", Linguistics: The Cambridge
Survey.1st ed. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. 268-284. Cambridge Books Online.Web. 08 July 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621055.016
Bickerton, D. and Muysken, P. 1988 "A dialog concerning the linguistic status of creole languages", Linguistics: The Cambridge
Survey. 1st ed. Vol. 2. Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1988.302-306.
Cambridge
Books
Online.Web.
08
July
2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621055.018
Kouwenberg, S. and Singler, J. V. 2009 The hand book of pidgin and creole studies John Wiley and Sons 2009
M Teresa Galarza Ballesterhttp://mural.uv.es/mgaba/an%20overview.html
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001 The ecology of language evolution Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001
N.J. Smelser, James Wright, P.B. Baltes and Dennis Hodgson 2002 international encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral
Sciences Fairfield University
Rickford. J. 1977a the field of pidgin-creole studiesA review article on Loreto Todds pidgin and creole. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1974. World Literature Written inEnglish (MLA Division 3) 16: 477-513.
Sebba, Mark (1997): Contact Languages: Pidgins and Creoles. London, Macmillan.
Todd, L. 1974 Pidgin and Creole by Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. 3 rd Ed. By Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005
Vidanovi, . 2006 the kuhnian aspects of the chomskyan scientific paradigmFacta
Universitatis Series: linguistics and literature UDC 81-116.6 81'364,vol. 4, no 1, 2006, pp. 19 - 26
Wardhaugh,
R.
An
Introduction
to
Sociolinguistics,
second
edition
https://www.webdepot.umontreal.ca/Usagers/tuitekj/MonDepotPublic/cours/2611pdf/Wardhaugh-Pidgin.pdf
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
20 | Page
DOI: 10.9790/0837-20351421
www.iosrjournals.org
21 | Page