Motivation in pidgin and creole genesis

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-264
Author(s):  
Mikael Parkvall
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Almost All

Abstract Almost all creolists see creole formation as a case of (failed) second language acquisition. I argue that there are good reasons to distinguish between second language acquisition and pidginisation/creolisation, and that little is gained by equating the two. While learners have an extant language as their target, pidginisers typically aim to communicate (in any which way) rather than to acquire a specific language. In this sense, pidginisation represents, if not “conscious language change”, at least “conscious language creation”.

The Development of Metropolitan Languages in Post-Colonial Contexts: Language Contact and Language Change and the Case of Portuguese in Maputo

1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-213
Author(s):  
Christopher Stroud
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Speech Community ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Contact Linguistics ◽  
The Social

This article explores briefly some phenomena of potential indigenization of the Portuguese spoken in Mozambique. Data for the study has been taken from work that is currently underway in Maputo, Mozambique, that was originally initiated to investigate contact varieties of Portuguese and to probe their educational implications. Speech samples comprise formal interviews and non-formal encounters from a socio-demographically representative sample of informants. The article first provides an inventory of some non-standard European Portuguese variants that are found in this data, and subsequently focusses upon a discussion of what contribution different linguistic processes make to indigenization, specifically the role played by processes of second language acquisition in a context of massive and diffuse language contact and change. Special attention is also paid to the social contexts in which different manifestations of language contact are found, and the importance of linguistic ideology for the form that language contact takes in particular cases is explored. The article concludes with the suggestion that the salient characteristics of types of non-native speech community such as Maputo require a reconceptualization of models and methods of contact linguistics and second language acquisition, and that this in turn carries implications for the terms of reference and analysis to which indigenization need be related.

Unique Applications of Multi-Agent Models in Uncovering Language Learning Processes

2008 ◽  
pp. 142-173
Author(s):  
Teresa Satterfield
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Multi Scale ◽  
Artificial Societies ◽  
Multi Agent ◽  
Language Emergence

Multi-scale “artificial societies” are constructed to examine competing first- and second-language acquisition-based theories of creole language emergence. Sociohistorical conditions and psycholinguistic capacities are integrated into the model as agents (slaves and slave-owners) interact. Linguistic transmissions are tracked, and grammar constructions are charted. The study demonstrates how a CAS approach offers clear indications for computational solutions to questions of language change and formation.

First- and Second-Language Acquisition and CILC

2020 ◽  
pp. 214-240
Author(s):  
Eva Duran Eppler ◽  
Gabriel Ozón
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Language Variation And Change ◽  
Language Data ◽  
L1 And L2

This chapter explores the contested role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced linguistic change (CILC). We first identify three factors underlying these controversies (field of research; theoretical approach; and methodological limitations/advances), before discussing two elements language change and language acquisition have in common (i.e., isolated individuals cannot accomplish either, and both have to be studied through natural language data, with its attendant high degree of variation). We go on to define key terms and concepts for the role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced language change, including first and second language acquisition (L1A and L2A), bilingual first language acquisition, language variation and change, language contact and contact-induced language change. In the main section we discuss the role of L1A and L2A in CILC, and examine different language-acquisition scenarios, in particular their potential for leading to CILC. We use these different language-acquisition types as testing grounds for the motivations behind (i.e., causes for, and triggers of) language change, and arrive at tentative conclusions about which of these language-acquisition scenarios is more likely to play a role in CILC, and why.

Pidgins and Creoles

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
John McWhorter
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Indigenous Languages ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Creole Languages

Creole languages have mostly resulted from interactions between Europeans and subordinated peoples amid colonization, trade, and imperialism. Given that the creation of these languages was usually driven as much by adults as children, second-language acquisition has a larger effect upon creole language structures than it does under most other conditions of language change and contact. Namely, it has traditionally been supposed that creole languages begin as makeshift pidgin varieties, expanded from this into full languages. However, various creolists have proposed that most creoles did not in fact emerge in this way; some argue that creoles are relexifications of indigenous languages, while others argue that nothing distinguishes creole genesis from language contact more generally.

What is Germanic and what is not about Old French V2

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-198
Author(s):  
Espen Klævik-Pettersen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Old French ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Historical Evidence ◽  
13Th Century ◽  
Internal Development ◽  
Strong Resemblance

Abstract Old French is considered by many to have been a verb-second (V2) language. Furthermore, 13th century Old French featured a V2 system with strong restrictions on the prefield, meaning only a single constituent was generally accepted to the left of the finite verb. This bears a strong resemblance to the pattern found in the Modern Germanic V2 languages and has occasionally given rise to suggestions that V2 was a Germanic property inherited from the language of the Franks. In this paper, a concrete hypothesis is developed for the diachronic evolution of Old French V2 from Late Latin. It is argued that the hypothesis of Germanic influence is not necessarily incorrect, but too simplistic, as the two synchronic components of the Old French V2 construction -namely V-to-C movement and restrictions on the prefield – most likely have their own and independent diachronies as well. Comparative and historical evidence is presented to show that V-to-C movement is very unlikely to have been a product of Germanic influence and should rather be considered an internal development from Latin. As for the restricted prefield (so-called ‘linear V2’), the scarcity or even absence of evidence does not allow firm conclusions, but some general theoretical insights from the literature on language change and second language acquisition combine to make the idea of Germanic influence quite plausible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document