Sranan TMA & substrate influenc



NSF Grant #BCS-0113826 RF Project # 741792

Final Report. December 2004.

The influence of West African languages on the TMA systems of two Surinamese creoles.

Project description.

The main objective of this research project is to investigate the role of influence from West African (specifically Gbe) languages in shaping the TMA system of the early creole that emerged on the plantations of Suriname roughly between 1680 and 1720. For this we investigate and compare two modern conservative descendants of the plantation creole and several of the modern conservative descendants of the main West African inputs to its formation. With respect to the former we focus on the mother tongue of the coastal Afro-Surinamese population, Sranan (SN), and its more conservative sister language, the Eastern Maroon Creole (EMC) spoken by the Aluku-Boni, Ndjuka and Paamaka ethnic groups. With regard to the West African input, we focus primarily on the Gbe group of languages and secondarily also on Kikongo and Akan. The linguistic analysis is based primarily on tape-recorded and elicited data collected in Suriname (SN and EMC) and Benin (Gbe). The data on the secondary input comes from the published literature and formal elicitations where that was possible. The study is intended as a contribution to a theory of creole formation, the principles and constraints which regulate it, and its relationship to other outcomes of language contact.

Participants:

PI. Donald Winford, The Ohio State University.

Co-PI: Bettina Migge. University of Frankfurt, Germany.

Consultants:

In Benin: Professor Hounkpati Capo, University of Benin. Director, Labo Gbe (Int.).

Daniel Gagnon (fieldwork coordinator). Labo Gbe (Int.).

In Suriname: Dr. Robby Morroy, Teacher Training Institute, University of Suriname.

In Holland: Dr. Enoch Aboh, Dept. of Linguistics, the University of Amsterdam.

Dr. James Essegby, Dept. of Linguistics, Leiden University.

Other organizations involved:

The University of Frankfurt.

Labo Gbe (Int.). (Laboratory for research on Gbe languages, Come, Mono, Benin).

IRD (Institut de recherche pour le développement, laboratoire linguistique Cayenne, French Guiana, France)

Objectives and Significance.

In accordance with the methodological frameworks outlined by scholars such as Weinreich (1953), Thomason and Kaufman (1988) and others, the empirical investigation of the origins of the Surinamese creole TMA systems involves the following stages:

An account of the historical and social aspects of the contact setting in order to determine (a) the linguistic inputs and (b) how factors such as the community settings, demographics and patterns of social interaction affected the outcomes of the contact.

Analysis and comparison of the TMA systems of the relevant input languages so as to identify the possible sources of the functional categories.

A principled explanation of the emergence of the TMA system of the early SPC which accounts for the “selection” of the categories and their means of expression. Such an explanation would be based on sociohistorical as well as linguistic evidence.

An account of the linguistic mechanisms involved, in terms of more general processes and principles operating n contact situations generally.

Some explanation of the emergence of a stable and relatively uniform creole grammar out of the different contact varieties that are likely to have emerged under the influence of different inputs.

4.1. Inputs and social contexts of the contact.

Our account of the sociohistorical background to the emergence of the (varieties of the) early Surinamese plantation creole is given below, in Section 5.1. Our account has implications for current debate among creolists concerning the nature of the linguistic inputs to creole formation, and the relative roles of adults vs children in this process (DeGraff 1999). The evidence we present will support the view that the creators of the early SPC were adult Africans who drew heavily on the resources of their L1’s to fashion a new medium of inter-group communication. We assume that in the initial stages, there were second language varieties of English which provided the lexical input for a pidginized variety that served as a lingua franca for inter-ethnic communication. In all probability, this early pidginized variety was a language without functional heads (TMA markers, complementizers, etc.) or other grammatical devices such as movement rules, We further assume that this pidgin became a target for learning by new arrivals from Africa who elaborated it, creating new varieties that in turn served as targets of learning and restructuring for successive waves of later imported slaves. This scenario created the conditions for the kinds of creative L1 retention and innovation typical of contact situations generally, but especially of creole formation.

Research Methodology

Our research plan is organized as follows:

Identification of the primary linguistic inputs to the contact setting that produced the early (varieties of the) Surinamese plantation creole.

Justification of our selection of contemporary communities in Suriname and Benin for purposes of data collection.

Methods of data collection.

Analysis and comparison of the TMA systems of the West African inputs and the Surinamese creoles.

Explanation of the emergence of the creole TMA systems in the light of the sociohistorical, demographic and linguistic evidence.

Implications of our findings for a theory of creole formation and theories of language contact outcomes in general.

5.1. Justification of choice of linguistic inputs.

Both the available sociohistorical documentation and the linguistic evidence from recent studies provide evidence that varieties of Gbe in particular played a major role in the formation of (varieties of) the early Surinamese plantation creole (Arends 1989; Bruyn 1994, 1995, 1996; Migge 1998a & b, 2000). The other West African languages which were also present in the formative contact situation, Kikongo and Akan, appear to have contributed much less to the grammar of the SPC, though Kikongo, and to a small extent, Akan, contributed to the vocabulary (Arends 1994, Huttar 1985). It is possible that Kikongo and Akan may also have influenced the emergence of the TMA system of the SPC . If (some) Kikongo varieties brought by slaves to Suriname in the 17th to 18th centuries employed periphrastic systems of TMA marking (Mufwene 1988, 1990b), they may well have reinforced the Gbe (and Akan) influence on the verb complex of the SPC, since Gbe, like the SPC, employs a periphrastic system. Kikongo influence may also have affected the semantics/pragmatics of particular TMA categories in the SPC. We plan to investigate these possibilities using the available literature on TMA in Kikongo (e.g., Mufwene 1988, 1990, Laman 1912).

The sociohistorical evidence indicates that the plantation creole was created roughly between 1680 and 1720 - the period during which the plantation economy replaced the earlier homestead-based economy established by English planters and continued under Dutch rule (1651 - 1680). The contact setting involved three broad groups of people - the Europeans, the early or "elite" slaves, and the new or "field" slaves. The three groups differed from one another with respect to their relative size, and social cohesion, and their members' social status, linguistic background, work tasks and patterns of interaction. The Europeans were the smallest group, making up less than 5% of the entire population. They made up the top of the social hierarchy and were responsible for organizing and delegating the different tasks on the plantation. They were mainly speakers of different European languages but also used L2-like varieties of English in communication with the slaves. They mainly interacted among themselves and with the elite slaves primarily for work-related issues. In the initial period, they remained on the plantation for a relatively long period of time. The elite slaves made up about 15% to 20% of the entire population and an intermediate social position on the plantation. Some of the early or elite slaves worked as domestic servants for the Europeans, others performed more skilled tasks on the plantation, and yet others were in charge of the main work force, the new slaves. They supervised and organized their work on the fields and in the sugar mills and they introduced the new arrivals to life on the plantation. They were speakers of different African languages but their main means of (interethnic) communication among themselves and with the Europeans and slaves were the L2-like varieties of English that they had acquired in Suriname or in other colonies prior to the onset of the plantation economy. This group had a relatively high degree of cohesion since its members had either already spent a relatively long period of time on a plantation or homestead, or were born there. They interacted primarily among themselves and for work-related issues they also interacted with the Europeans and the new slaves. Finally, the largest group on the plantation were the new slaves who were arriving during this period. They constituted between 75% to 80% of the entire population but had the lowest social status. They were responsible for the planting, harvesting, transporting etc. of the plantation's main cash crop(s). They had a low degree of social cohesion since the majority of them were not familiar with life on the plantations, were constantly changing, and did not share common social and linguistic conventions. In the initial plantation period (1684-1695), the new slaves consisted of equal numbers of Kikongo and Gbe speakers and in the second part more than 70% of the new slaves were Gbe speakers. The new slaves interacted mainly among themselves and to a small degree also with the elite slaves mainly about work-related matters. These facts suggest, first, that the plantation creole was created in the interaction among the new slaves and between them and the elite slaves. Second, the inputs to the formation of the plantation creole were the native languages of the new slaves, particularly Gbe, and the L2 varieties spoken by the elite slaves. However, the former played a more important role, since the interactions among the slaves were more frequent and communicationally more complex. Third, in the interactions among themselves, the new slaves accommodated to each other linguistically since they were socially on a par while in the latter settings the new slaves accommodated to the elite slaves since they were socially in a subordinate position. Fourth, the new slaves were not able to acquire the L2 varieties of English and shift to them. They only learned and adopted a limited range of highly salient items from them in the interactions with the elite slaves. As these features gradually became part of their linguistic repertoire, they also employed them in their interactions with their fellow field slaves by combining them with material from their native languages.

5.2. Selection of communities for data collection.

5.2.1. Benin.

The Dutch slave coast that supplied most of the slaves to Suriname from 1680 - 1720 corresponds roughly to the coastal areas of modern Benin and Togo, hence our decision to investigate Gbe varieties in these areas. For purposes of this study, we follow Capo's (1988,) classification of the five major subgroups of Gbe, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Major subgroups of Gbe

GBE

Subgroups: Vhe (Ewe) Gen Ajá Fon Phla-Phera

Languages: Wací Glijí Dogbó Maxí Alada

Awlan Anéxo Stádó Gun Phla (Xwla)

Vo Agoi Hwe Wéme Phelá (Xwelá)

etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

The historical records do not allow us to accurately determine exactly which Gbe groups were present in what numbers in Suriname from 1680 - 1720. However, research by Pazzi (1979) suggests that the Gbe peoples who were at the time living on the coast between the present-day towns of Cotonou and Lome and roughly 100 miles inland were primarily involved in the slave trade as either slaves or traders. They were the ancestors of the present-day Gen, Phla-Phera and various Vhe groups, among others. The present investigation will employ representatives of each major subcluster of Gbe for the linguistic analysis. We chose varieties that are spoken by groups directly descended from those that were involved in the slave trade. These groups are still functioning ethnolinguistic communities in the same area today, and have not been subject to any significant new external linguistic influence since the period of the slave trade (Migge 1998a & b, 2000).

5.2.2. Suriname.

The Surinamese communities we selected include Afro-Surinamese working-class groups in the capital, Paramaribo, and rural groups in Coronie, all of whom speak Sranan as their first language. The varieties of Sranan that are used as a first language by working-class urban and rural Afro-Surinamese tend to be more conservative and less subject to influence from Dutch than those used by middle-class persons, or by other ethnic groups for whom Sranan is often a second language (Winford 1997).

The EMC data come mainly from monolingual subsistence farmers who were raised and live in the remote ancestral villages of the Ndyuka and Paamaka communities in eastern Suriname. The EMC varieties as spoken in the villages are not subject to much external influence, and represent the most conservative descendants of the early plantation creole. The escaped slaves who created these communities in the mid 18th century employed (varieties of) the plantation creole as their community language. They remained in close contact with the plantation slaves, replenishing their communities with (mostly female) slaves from that group (Hoogbergen 1990a, b). These communities did not have contact with other language groups, and have remained in relative isolation until recently. The comparison of the EMC with Sranan will therefore allow us to identify those shared aspects of grammar that are likely to have descended directly from the SPC.

5.2.3. On the use of contemporary data - a caveat.

One of the major problems facing the student of creole genesis is the unavailabilty of data from the period of creole formation. This makes it difficult to determine the structure of the inputs at the time of creole formation some 300 years ago. However, as Thomason (1993) reminds us, 300 years is not a very long time in the history of a language. We can assume (unless there is strong evidence to the contrary) that the contemporary grammars of the relevant input languages are quite similar to what they were in the 17th to 18th centuries.

The choice of more conservative (rural) varieties of SN and the EMC was based on the assumption that such varieties preserve older features of the language more faithfully than urban ones. Moreover, Ndjuka itself is an excellent point of comparison and contrast with Sranan. The former has remained quite isolated from external (e.g. Dutch and Sranan) influence over the centuries, and arguably provides a better window on the earlier plantation creole than its sister. For example, Sranan has borrowed a great deal of vocabulary as well as some grammatical formatives from Dutch in the recent past, whereas Ndjuka shows none of this influence, at least in its TMA system.

Finally, there is the difficulty of distinguishing different stages of creole development and their attendant influences. As Arends (1989, 1993) and Baker (1995) have argued, we cannot assume that all of the features of creole grammar were established in a single generation as Bickerton (1984) claimed, or even in the first 100 years of settlement. The evidence from available historical texts of Sranan, for instance, suggests that many features, including TMA markers, emerged over a longer period of time. Thus Baker shows that, in the case of Sranan,. the past and future markers were attested by 1718, the progressive [Imperfective - DW] by 1777, and two-marker combinations by 1798. However, the texts are not complete enough for us to draw firm conclusions about the character of the early 18th century plantation creole. We shall employ them as far as they prove useful.

5.3. Data collection.

The primary data that we used in this investigation consist of recorded conversations and elicitations obtained via specially-designed questionnaires (see Section 6 below). Not surprisingly, our earlier investigations of the TMA system of Sranan has revealed that, while recorded conversations provide a wealth of information, there are always features which fail to appear even in large corpora of recorded speech. Examples of such features include rarer auxiliary combinations, particular kinds of modality, use of TMA markers with certain predicate types, etc. Elicitations were designed to fill such gaps, as well as to reinforce the findings from recorded speech.

Previous research by Winford (funded by NSF grant # SBR - 930635.) and Migge provided much of the data we used for this investigation. In 1993 - 1994, Winford collected some 60 hours of recorded conversations in Sranan as well as elicited data on TMA and other areas of Sranan grammar from working-class urban and rural communities in Suriname. These data have been used for a number of analyses of Sranan TMA (see section 5.3.1 below). However, we obtained further elicitations from Sranan informants to fill the gaps in our present knowledge of the creole’s TMA system. For this purpose, we used several informants who are bilingual in Sranan and English who assisted Winford in previous fieldwork in Suriname between 1993 and 1994.

With regard to Gbe, we base our analysis on elicitations as well as at recorded speech from each of 5 Gbe varieties representing the 5 subgroups mentioned earlier, in Section 5.1. Our data base now consists of the following:

Ajagbe: Two one-hour recordings. (11 informants in addition to the interviewer).

Gengbe: Two one-hour recordings. (11 informants in addition to the interviewer).

Maxigbe: Two one-hour recordings. (7 informants in addition to the interviewer).

Wacigbe: Four one-hour recordings. (14 informants in addition to the interviewer).

Xwelagbe: Three one-hour recordings. (6 informants in addition to the interviewer).

Xwlagbe: Four one-hour recordings. (Total of 15 informants in addition to the interviewer).

2 hours of recorded speech for Wacigbe ((Vhe), 2 for Maxigbe (Fon), and 1 for Phelagbe (Phla-Phera), ? for Gengbe and ?? for Ajagbe. We also conducted detailed elicitations (20 hours at least) with one native speaker of each of the 5 Gbe varieties mentioned above.

The recordings of Gbe conversations were done by graduate students at the Université national du Benin who are native speakers of the respective Gbe varieties and had previously been employed as fieldworkers and informants for Migge. They have had training in Linguistics under our consultant, Prof. H. Capo, and were thoroughly briefed by Migge, who guided them in obtaining the recordings. The elicitations were conducted by Migge in French (the official language of Benin) with the help of graduate students bilingual in French and Gbe varieties. Our consultant, Prof. Capo, also assisted with the design and wording of the French version of the questionnaire, and to some extent with the elicitations.

All of the recorded data from both Gbe and the Surinamese creoles has now been transcribed and translated. For this purpose, we employed graduate students and other consultants in Benin and Suriname who have done such work for Migge and Winford in the past.

6. Analyzing and comparing TMA systems of Gbe and the Surinamese creoles.

It is obvious that a mere comparison of the inventory of categories across the Gbe and Surinamese languages will reveal very little for our purposes. A meaningful comparison must include (at least) the following:

• The inventory and overall organization of the TMA categories.

• The structure of specific sub-systems of tense, modality and aspect.

• The semantics/pragmatics of the categories themselves,

• The interplay between TMA categories and the aktionsarten of different predicate types.

• The syntax (positioning and combinatory possibilities) of the TMA markers.

The framework we employ here is based on approaches to TMA systems in the semantic and typological literature, including the work of Binnick (1991), Bybee and Dahl (1989), Bybee et al (1994), Comrie (1976, 1985), Chung and Timberlake (1985), Dahl (1985), Lyons (1977), Palmer (1986), Smith (1991), and others (see Winford 2000a, b.)

Following Dahl (1985:33), we choose a comparison based on categories themselves, rather than on the sets of semantic features out of which they are built. In this approach, a language specific TMA category such as the English Future can be regarded as the realization of a cross-linguistic category-type such as FUTURE. (Here we follow Dahl's practice of using capitals to refer to category-types, initial capitals to refer to language specific categories, and lower-case letters with single quotes to refer to notional semantic categories, e.g., 'future'. One of the considerations that is crucial to any cross-linguistic comparison is the fact that TMA categories in every language typically display a range of meanings and uses. Again we follow Dahl's suggestion that each TMA category displays "dominant" as opposed to "secondary" meanings, reflected in its prototypical and peripheral uses respectively. Thus the English Progressive conveys the dominant sense of ongoing activity (its prototypical use), but can convey the sense of immediate future (I'm seeing her tonight) - a secondary meaning and peripheral use. As Dahl notes:

"The main criterion for identifying TMA categories cross-linguistically is by their foci or prototypical uses, and ... languages vary essentially in two respects: (i) which categories they choose out of the set of cross-linguistic categories, and (ii) how they reduce the impreciseness that these categories have in choosing among the possible secondary or non-focal uses they have" (1985:33).

From this it follows that if our comparison of Gbe and Surinamese creoles reveals close similarities in both the semantics and pragmatics, as well as syntax, that would be strong evidence of influence from the former on the latter. Hence our need for exhaustive recorded data which include discourse context. This applies equally well to elicited data. Therefore we will employ our modified versions of Dahl's (1985) cross-linguistic questionnaire, in which the sentences to be elicited are placed in an appropriate discourse context and informants are given clear indications, with additional explanation where necessary, of the contexts in which they are to envisage the sentences being uttered.

Both Winford and Migge have already employed such elicitation methods with success. By way of illustration, to elicit an utterance containing a verb with past time reference, one of the prompts used is as follows:

(It is cold in the room. The window is closed]. Q: you OPEN the window (and closed it again)?

Material enclosed in square brackets is meant to provide a context for the utterance to be elicited (the translation of which is outside the brackets). Verbs are offered in bare form (capitalized in the text) so as to minimize the possibility of interference from English (or French, as the case may be). Hence the choice of the pertinent category would have to be based on information deduced by the informant from the prompt sentence and the discourse context. Further discussion of the assumptions, methods and difficulties associated with the use of the TMA questionnaire can be found in Dahl (1985:44-50) and Winford (2000a).

Findings resulting from these activities.

A preliminary comparison of tense/aspect in Gbe and the Surinamese creoles.

5. A comparison of tense/aspect in the Surinamese Creoles and Gbe.

To establish a basis for our comparison with Gbe languages, table 2 presents an overview of the tense/aspect categories of Sranan and Pamaka

Table 2: Tense/aspect in Sranan and Pamaka.

(All forms are preverbal, except for Perfect kaba, which is VP-final.)

Tense

Forms Category Meanings

SN PM

ben be Relative Past Past events 'distanced' from S. Background past or 'framepast' especially in narratives. Past in relation to another reference point in the past.

o o Future Later time reference; Intention or prediction.

Predictability.

Aspect

ø ø Perfective States or events seen as unanalyzed wholes.

e e Imperfective Situations (both states and occurrences) seen as 'unbounded' and ongoing at reference time, which encompasses situations that are repeated, habitual, in progress or continuous.

kaba kaba Perfect Situations seen as completed. Conveys the meaning 'already.' Expresses the sense of a 'perfect of result' with non-statives, and the sense of a state beginning in the past and continuing to the reference point with statives.

Our main concern, then, is to explain why the shared TMA categories and the forms that express them were incorporated into the TMA systems of these creoles. The hypotheses to be tested here include the following:

Hypothesis 1.

Categories that are shared across the (dominant) substrates, and with the superstrate, are most likely to be retained in the Creole.

Hypothesis 2.

Surface structures (means of expression - preverbal, periphrastic, etc) shared among the substrates and the superstrate will be retained in the Creole.

Hypothesis 3.

Superstrate forms whose syntax (positioning) and semantics (partly) match those of substrate functional heads will be selected to express the functional categories of the Creole.

Tense/aspect in Gbe.

All Gbe languages share more or less the same inventory of tense/aspect categories, as illustrated in Table 3. For convenience, only general patterns are represented, and the various forms used to express the categories are not all listed in cases where their phonological shapes vary significantly.

Table 3. Tense/Aspect categories in Gbe languages.

Form Category Meanings/Uses.

Tense.

lá/ná/á Future Later time reference.

Aspect.

ø Perfective States or events seen as unanalyzed wholes.Simple past with non-statives, present with statives (when reference point is S).

Perfect Situations seen as completed. Conveys the

meaning 'already.' Expresses the sense of a

Perfect + V Pattern (a) perfect of result' with non-statives, and the sense

(Maxi, Xwela,Xwla) of a state beginning in the past and continuing to

the reference point with statives.

VP + Perfect Pattern (b)

(Aja, Gen, Waci)

Progressive Events in progress.

‘Be’ VV Part. Pattern (a) In cases where the Prog. Marker immediately precedes the verb, eg. Intransitives or transitive verbs taking a pronominal object (SVO order).

‘Be’ XP V part. Pattern (b) In other transitive sentences.

Habitual Customary or habitual situations.

V + na/nO Pattern (a) (Aja, Gen, Wací)

nO + V Pattern (b) (Maxi, Xwla)

High tone on V (Xwela)

Prospective Events about to occur.

‘Be’ XP na V Pattern (a) [data incomplete]

‘come’ VP gbe Pattern (b) [data incomplete]

5.1. Comparing Perfective in Gbe and the Surinamese creoles.

Both in Gbe and Surinamese creoles, the Perfective category, expressed by the unmarked verb, is used in a more or less identical range of meanings and uses. Table 4 shows the range of uses of the unmarked verb in Gbe. The range is identical in the Surinamese creoles, with the exception of statives with past time reference, which are unmarked in Gbe, but marked by Past in Suriname. The numbers in parentheses refer to the sentences on the questionnaires used for the elicitations. In each case, the sentences compared are the same – a strategy that ensures accuracy in our discussion of the categories involved.

Table 4. Uses of Perfective (the unmarked verb)

Statives etc. with present reference.

Gbe (all languages) Sranan Paamaka

Property items

(E1,4) (cold, hot) ø ø ø

Performative verbs ø ø ø

(E45, 46) (promise)

Stative verbs ø ø ø

(E47, 48, 49) (know, love)

Non-statives with past reference

(E50, 51, 53, 54, 55) ø ø ø

(E67, 68, 74, 75, 76) ø ø ø

Non-statives with ‘present perfect’ meaning (current relevance).

(E99, 101, 102) ø ø ø ø

[Note: Perfect ko was optional for our Maxigbe informant in sentence (101)].

The similarities here are particularly striking. In all languages, the unmarked verb conveys the sense of ‘present’ with statives (1) and ‘simple past’ with non-stative verbs (2) in the default cases, where the point of reference is speech time (S).

E 47

(1) Aja. Nsuvi l(( je(i ny(nuvi l(.

boy DET know girl DET

‘The boy knows the girl.’

Pamaka A boi sabi a meise.

DET boi know DET girl

‘The boy knows the girl.’

E 50

(2) Aja. E cu(cu( e(yi x((m(.

he clean his room

‘He cleaned his room.’

PM A kiin/seeka en kamba.

He clean/arrange his room

The unmarked verb is also used in all the languages to convey the sense of current relevance, in much the same way as the English Perfect does. The following examples illustrate:

E 99.

(3) Aja. Wo( wu a(x((su l(.

they kill king DET

‘They killed the king.’

PM Den kii a kownu.

They kill DET king

SN Den kiri a kownu.

‘They killed the king.’

The close similarities in meaning and use of the unmarked verb suggest that Gbe influence played a primary role in the emergence of the Perfective category in the Surinamese creoles.

5.2. Comparing the Perfect in Gbe and the Surinamese creoles.

A very similar picture emerges when we compare uses of the Perfect across these languages. First, consider table 5, which presents examples of the use of Perfect in affirmative declarative sentences, where the meaning of “already” (completed situation) is conveyed.

Table 5. Uses of the Perfect to convey the sense of “already” or ‘completed’

Maxi, Xwela,Xwla Aja, Gen / Waci Sranan Paamaka

(E100) ?/mO/nO VP VP vO VP kaba VP kaba

(E106) ko/mO/nO VP VP vO VP kaba VP kaba

(E98) ko/mO/nO VP VP vO ø (dede) ø (dede)

With the exception of (E98), all languages employ the Perfect to express the sense of completion.[1] Even in (E98), however, the choice of kaba is an option in the Surinamese creoles. The following examples illustrate:

E 106.

(4) Aja. A(x((su l( a(, e va( ∂o( v((.

king the TOP he come arrive already

‘As for the king, he has already come.’

PM A kownu, a kon kaba.

DET king he come already

SN A kownu doro kaba.

‘The king has already come.’

The Perfect is also used more or less uniformly in interrogative sentences in which the sense of “already’ is expressed, as the following illustrate:

E 103.

(5) Gen O kp(( fofo( ny( v( a?

you see brother my PERF Q

‘Have you already seen my brother?’

PM I miti mi baala kaba?

You meet my brother already

The close similarities in these cases are reinforced by the fact that the forms used to instantiate the category Perfect in the Surinamese Creoles and in several of the Gbe varieties (Aja, Gen, Waci) are also used as main verbs that mean “finish.”[2] The following examples illustrate.

(6) Gen γα∼λι!−α! ϖΟ. (Gengbe. Jondoh 1980:50)

gali-the finish

‘There's no more gali.’

PM Money kaba.

money finish

‘There is no more money.’

The strong similarities in the use of kaba "finish" as a main verb and a marker of Completive/Perfect aspect in the Surinamese creoles are striking, and would therefore seem to be the result of substrate influence.

5.3. The expression of ‘imperfective’ meaning in Gbe and the Surinamese creoles.

Auxiliary e in the Surinamese creoles expresses a range of meanings, including 'durative, iterative and continuous' (Voorhoeve 1957:376; Seuren 1981:1052). Bickerton (1981) analyzed it as instantiating an aspectual category that he labeled “non-punctual.” Winford (2000a) provides clear evidence that it represents an Imperfective aspectual category, whose primary use is to express both ‘habitual’ and ‘progressive’ meanings, and which can express other secondary meanings as well.

The Gbe languages have no Imperfective category. Rather, they distinguish between a Habitual and a Progressive. Our task here is to explain why the Surinamese creoles do not follow Gbe in distinguishing between ‘habitual’ and ‘progressive,’ but subsume these meanings under a single category. We will show that part of the answer lies in the strong resemblance between the Gbe Progressive and the Surinamese Imperfective, which will become apparent below.

1 5.3.1. The Progressive in Gbe

The Progressive in most Gbe languages is expressed by a copula which takes what appears to be a nominalized VP followed (in most cases) by an adverbial particle of some kind. There are two general patterns, as shown in (12).

(7) (a) COP VV. PART

(b) COP NP (NP/XP)V PART.

E 24

(8) Aja E wl((nwl((n enu go, e d((nd(((n al(n.

He write-PROG thing NEG he sleepsleep-PROG sleep

‘He is not writing a letter, he is sleeping.’

E 25

(9) Aja E le( anyi n(n( yi le( enu hl(n.

he PROG ground sit-sit and PROG thing read

‘He sitting and reading something.’

Gen and Xwela, for example, appear to use the same pattern “Prog. V” in all cases, that is, with both transitive and intransitive verbs, as in the following examples:

E 24

(10) Gen Mu( lee( wl(n nu o, e lee( d(n al(n.

NEG PROG write thing NEG he PROG sleep sleep

‘He is not writing a letter, he is sleeping.’

In the Surinamese creoles, the Imperfective marker e is used in all progressives, as the following example illustrates.

E 24.

(11) PM Nono, a ná e sikiifi biifi, a e siibi.

No he NEG PROG write letter he PROG sleep

“No, he’s not writing letters, he’s sleeping.

The important thing for our purposes is the fact that the first element in all these constructions (lé, ∂(, etc. in Gge, de in Suriname) is identical to the locative copula (Jondoh 1980:37; Lefebvre 1996:269).[3]

(12) Gen (( λε∼ εκπλΟ∃−α ϕι. (Gengbe. Jondoh 1980:46)

it be table-the on.

‘It's on the table.’

SN A pikin de a oso

DET child COP LOC house

“The child’s at home”

We argue that the emergence of de as a locative copula in the early plantation creole was the trigger for its extension to the marking of progressive meaning. The model for this was the fact that the locative copula of the Gbe languages had the same function as a TMA marker. Later, this Progressive marker evolved into a marker of Imperfective aspect. Hence this category can be traced ultimately to Gbe influence (reinforced by other substrate languages which had a similar strategy for marking Progressive).

Problematic categories include the Relative Past of the Surinamese creoles, which has no counterpart in any Gbe category, and the Prospective category of Gbe, which has no clear counterpart in the Surinamese creoles. We will not discuss these any further here,

6. A comparison of Modality in the creoles of Suriname and in Gbe

Tables 6 and 7 provide an overview of modality categories in four creoles of Suriname and Gbe, respectively.

Table 6: Modality in the Surinamese Creoles

Forms Category Meanings

SN PM ND SM

sabi sabi sabi sá Learned ability Ability or skills acquired through learning or

training.

Potential Uncertain or hypothetical future. Possibility.

sa sa sa sa Positive Expectation. Future situations (eg a wish or

[kande, o/sa ] hope) not subject to speaker’s control, or to

kan/sa man poi sa Negative the certainty of which the speaker is

not committed.

Deontic (root) Ability/possibility subject to moral or social

Possibility law, involving situations under the agent’s

kan sa sa sa Positive control.

man/kan man poi sa Negative

Permission Deontic possibility imposed by authority

kan/mag sa sa sa Positive (social, legal, etc.).

man/kan man poi sa Negative

mag

Physical Ability (Deontic) Ability subject to physical

kan/ sa/ sa/ sa Positive or natural law.

man man poi

man man poi sa Negative

Obligation Deontic senses of 'must'.

mus(u) mu mu musu Epistemic Inference based on

[musu ] (stronger) sound evidence (prior knowledge,

[ musu fu ]musu u (strong) experience, etc.)

A mu(su) de taki/taa Necessity Expresses speaker’s certainty about some

state or activity.

[wani ]k( Desire Expresses speaker’s desire and need.

[a(bi) fanoudu (fu) ] Need Expresses speaker’s need.

[fanoudu]

[efu ]yee Conditional

Past V, Past o/sa V counterfactual Expresses situations that the speaker

assumes to be or knows to be non-factual.

Table 7: Modality in the six Gbe varieties

Forms Gloss Category

Aja Gen Waci Xwela Xwla Maxi

nya nya nyan ny( ny( ny( ‘know’ Learned ability

te(u te( ti( te(u t(n sixu ‘may’ Potential

Root Possibility

a_dru te( ti( h(n, la t(n sixu Positive

s(n(u te( ti( kpego kpeji sixu Negative

Permission

a_dru/ te( ti( h(n, la/ t(n/ sixu Positive

s(n(u te(u kpeji

_dru

s(n(u te( ti( kpego kpeji/ sixu Negative

t(n

Physical Ability

a_dru te( ti(/ jro, la t(n/ h(n, na/ Positive

tia kpeji sixu

s(n(u/ te( ti(/ kpego kpeji/ sixu/ Negative

kpe(u te(- kp(ji/ t(n kpego/ji

kpeji tia

∂o a ∂o la ∂o la ∂o la ∂o o a ∂o na “must” Obligation

ji ji ji din/jro ka jlo/ba “search” Desire

∂o_wudo hyan/ hinyan hyan/ kan ba “need” Need

ji din

n( n( n( n( n( e nyi Conditional

sa, a ke, la k(, la m(, la m( do, a n( ko, na ko Counterfactual

6. 1. Preliminary comparison of modality in the Creoles of Suriname and Gbe

A comparison of tables 6 and 7 reveals several striking similarities between the creoles of Suriname and varieties of Gbe in the area of modality. They seem to share the same modal categories and while they use different forms to express them, these forms appear to have close semantic and syntactic distributions in the two language groups. The similarities are particularly close between the maroon varieties and the Gbe varieties.

Space permits us to consider only the modal notion of possibility.

6. 2. Deontic possibility and permission.

The first striking similarity between the creoles of Suriname and Gbe, is that they all distinguish Learned Ability from other kinds of ability or possibility. All employ the main verb ‘know’ to express learned ability, i.e. mental or physical ability that requires special knowledge or learning. The following examples illustrate:

E 1.

(13) PM A pikin de, a sabi suwen.

DET child DEM s/he know swim

Gen ∂evi( a nya( si pupu.

child DET know water swim

In addition, all of these languages make use of the same preverbal forms to express various other types of possibility, including physical ability, deontic (root) possibility, permission and epistemic possibility.

In the maroon creoles, sa is used to convey all the senses above. Sranan employs kan or, in some cases, man for physical ability, (E 3), kan or mag (< Dutch) for permission, and kan for root possibility. These seem to be due to developments peculiar to Sranan.

E 3 (Physical Ability).

(14) ND A taanga, a sa diki wan ondoo kilo.

he strong he can lift one hundred kilo

SN A tranga k’falek. A man/kan opo hondro kilo.

he strong dangerous he can lift hundred kilo

‘He is (very) strong. He can lift 100 kilos.’

E 9 (Permission).

(15) SM Aaii, di mii sa fika duumi ku mi.

yes, DET child can remain sleep with me

‘Yes the child may remain and sleep at my place.’

SN A boi kan/mag tan dya tide neti.

“The boy may stay here tonight”

E 5 (Root possibility)

(16) ND Mi abi moni, mi sa go na a fesa.

I have mony I can go LOC DET party

SN Mi abi moni. Mi kan go na a fesa.

I have money I can go LOC DET party

‘I have money so I can go to the party.’

Like the maroon creoles, most Gbe varieties (Gen, Waci, Maxi, Xwla) also employ a single modal to convey all types of possibility, as shown in the following:

E 3 (Physical Ability)..

(17) Xwla e( j(( a(su(. e( t((n k(( kilo k(nwe(wi(.

he become man he can lift kilo 100

‘He is very strong. He can lift 100 kilos.’ (has not see him do it)

E 9 (Permission)

(18) Xwla e(vi (( t((n n(( fi( xwe(sa( xe(((.

child DET can stay here night this

‘The boy may stay here tonight.’

E 5 (Root possibility)

(19) Xwla u(n ∂o( ((ho, bo(nyi( u(n t((n s((n ∂u( xwe(.

I have money thus I can go eat party

‘I have money so I can go to the party.’

Negative possibility.

Another interesting similarity is found in the use of modals of possibility in negative contexts. In such contexts, SN and PM both employ different forms than those used in positive contexts. This use of a different modal of possibilty in these negative contexts is also found in several of the Gbe varieties (Aja, Xwela, Xwla).

E 8 (Negative physical ability)

(20) PM Mi ná man kon a neti ya bika mi siki. ND Mi á poi kon a neti ya, (bika) mi siki.

I NEG can come DET night here ‘caus I sick

“I can’t come tonight because I’m sick”

Xwla u((n kpe(ji( a( ba( hwe(sa( o( ∂o( (( u(n

NEG can FUT come night NEG ‘caus PART I

yi( ((z((n.

take sick

“I can’t come tonight because I’m sick”

E 10 (Negative permission)

(21) PM-2 A boi án man tan ya tide neti.

DET boy NEG can stay here today night

Xwla e(vi (( u(n kpe(ji( a( n(( fi( hwe(sa( xe((( o(.

Child DET NEG can FUT stay here night this NEG

‘The child cannot (i.e. absolutely not) stay here tonight.’

E 6 (Negative root possibility).

(22) ND Mi ná abi moni, mi ná o poi go na a fesa.

I NEG have money I NEG FUT can go LOC DET party

SN Mi no abi moni so fasi mi no man go na a

I NEG have money so fashion I NEG can go LOC DET

fesa.

party

Xwla Ml(( u(n ∂o( ((ho( o(, bo(nyi( ml(( u(n kpe(-ji( a ( I NEG have money NEG thus I NEG can FUT

s((n ∂u( xwe( o(.

go eat party NEG

“I don’t have money, so I can’t go to the party”

By contrast with the other Surinamese creoles, Saamaka patterns after other Gbe varieties (Gen, Waci, Maxi), which employ the same modal in both positive and negative contexrs.

E 8 (Negative physical ability)

(23) SM Mé sa ko tide moo, mi fii siki tide.

I-NEG can come today more I feel sick today

‘I cannot come tonight/today because I am/feel sick.’

Gen Ny( maa( te(( va wetr((m( o, ∂o(

I NEG-FUT can come night-in NEG have

nuke((tia mu le( ed(.

thing-reason I catch sick

‘I cannot come tonight because I am sick.’

E 6 (Negative root possibility).

(24) SM Mé a(bi) moni, nou mi á sa go a booko di dia.

I-N have money now I NEG can go LOC break DET day

‘I don’t have money, this I cannot go to the party.’

Gen Ny( mu( ∂o( ega o, ny( maa( te(( ∂u

I NEG have money NEG I I- NEG FUT can eat

aza(n (o).

party NEG

‘I don’t have money thus I cannot go to the party.’

E 10 (Negative permission).

(25) SM Á sa fika ku mi a ndeti aki.

NEG can remain with me DET night here

‘The child/he cannot stay here tonight.’

Gen. Nu(suvi( a maa( te(( n( fi(ye wetr((m( o.

child DET NEG-Fut can stay here night NEG

‘The child cannot stay here tonight.’

Epistemic Possibility.

Finally, there is the category of epistemic possibility, that is, possibility based on the speaker’s subjective evaluation of the situation. In the maroon creoles this meaning is expressed by either the preverbal marker sa or by the adverbial kande in conjunction with the future marker o or the modal sa (E16).

E 16.

(26) PM-1 Alen sa kai tide bakadina.

rain can fall today evening

Kande alen o/sa kai tide bakadina.

maybe rain FUT/POT fall today evening

‘It may rain this evening.’

However, Sranan seems to prefer one of the following two periphrastic constructions: kande + o.sa; or a kan taki.

E 16

(27) SN Kande alen o kon tide neti.

maybe rain FUT come today night

‘It may rain tonight.’

SN A kan taki John de na oso.

It can say John COP LOC house

‘John may be at home.’

In SN, the use of just sa to express epistemic possibility seems to be restricted to constructions with copula de or Imperfective e in Sranan; sa seems to be unacceptable with activity verbs.[4]

E 21

(28) SN J. sa de na oso.

J. can COP LOC house

‘John may be at home right now.’

E22

(29) SN Den pikin sa e sribi now.

DET child may PROG sleep now

‘The children may be sleeping right now.’

At least in Pamaka, it is also possible to employ the construction a sa de taki to convey epistemic possibility. Our informants suggested that it is old-fashioned though.

E 18

(30) PM A sa de taki a o go a Faansi djonson.

it can COP say she FUT go LOC France soon

‘It’s possible that she’ll go to France soon.’

In the Gbe languages, epistemic modality with activity and stative verbs is essentially conveyed by the same markers that express ability, permission and root possibility as illustrated by the following examples from Gen.

E 18

(31) Gen Jan la( te(( yi yovo(de( wetri( (e a m(.

Jean FUT can go Europe month other DET in

‘Jean may go to Europe next week.’

Gen Jan (la() te(( n( axo(m( fi(fij((n faa.

Jean FUT can COP house now easily

‘Jean may be at home now.’

Interestingly, Aja uses teNu in this context, but employs senNu to express other types of possibility.

(45) Aja. Jan te(u le( a(xo(m( evy(( c((.

Jean can COP house now this

‘Jean may be at home now.’

Aja N da s((n(u va( wetr( gb( go(, ∂o

I NEG-FUT can come evening come NEG ‘caus

n de le e(te(.

I NEG COP up-right

‘I’ll not be able to come tonight because I am sick.’

We have no data for negative epistemic modality at this point.

This brief discussion of possibility in several creoles of Suriname and Gbe provides evidence in favor of Hypotheses 1 and 2. The modality categories and main strategies used to express them in the creoles are very similar to those in the substrate languages.

There are also similarities in the expression of other modal meanings, such as obligation, desire and need. But the expression of modality in the Surinamese creoles is by no means a replica of the Gbe pattern. At this point it is not entirely clear what the origin of the differences among the creoles of Suriname and the Gbe varieties is.

In addition, it is not entirely clear whether all these similarities date from the period of the initial emergence of the creoles or rather emerged later. Van den Berg (2001), for example, provides evidence that the (negative) preverbal marker man emerged as a negative ability marker only in the later part of the 18th century. This may suggest that the distinction between negative and affirmative ability, possibility etc. only emerged later and/or was previously expressed using a different form/strategy.

7. Explaining the origins of TMA in the Surinamese creoles.

In itself, the comparison we have presented so far explains little about the origins of TMA in the Surinamese creoles. A mere comparison can offer only a basis for explanation, and such an explanation must address a number of questions concerning not just the sources of Creole grammar, but also the processes and principles that shaped it. Among the questions to be addressed are the following:

• What determines which substratal or superstratal features will find their way into the Creole?

• How do we explain aspects of Creole grammar that have no model in either the superstrate or the substrate languages?

• What explains the selection of surface forms to express the TMA categories of the Creole?

• What kinds of processes, and what principles of contact-induced change, were involved in the emergence of Creole grammar?

Our approach to these questions assumes that Creole formation involved second language acquisition, and that the sources and character of Creole grammar can be explained in terms of processes and principles that apply, to varying degrees, in all cases of second language acquisition.

7.1. Creole formation as second language acquisition

Like creolists, SLA researchers have long been investigating the relative roles of universals and L1 "transfer" (substratum influence) in shaping the acquisition process. Several scholars (Chaudenson 2001, DeGraff to appear, Mufwene 1990, Siegel 1999, Thomason & Kaufman 1988, Wekker 1996, etc.) have discussed the similarities between SLA and Creole formation. While it is clear that the two are not similar in all respects, they both involve retention of L1 strategies as well as (other) universal strategies of learning and accommodation. The extent of L1 influence and other creative strategies depends on a range of socio-demographic factors that have been discussed in great detail in the literature (Arends 1995, Chaudenson 2001, Mufwene 2002, Singler 1995 etc.) In several cases of Creole formation, as we have seen, conditions were suitable for continued input, and hence, stronger influence from superstrate dialects. In the case of the Surinamese Creoles, the unavailability of English as a continuing target meant that the creators of these Creoles relied increasingly on their L1 grammars to develop the Creole’s resources, while the superstrate varieties, such as they were, supplied mostly lexical input.

Our view is that, like other cases of natural second language acquisition, Creole formation involves “imperfect” learning and varying degrees of substratum influence, or what SLA researchers refer to as "transfer" (Thomason & Kaufman 1988, Chaudenson 1992, DeGraff 1999, etc.). Others have argued that creoles arise through a process of relexification and reanalysis similar to that which produced bilingual mixed languages like Media Lengua (Lefebvre & Lumsden 1994, Lefebvre 1997, Lumsden 1999, etc.). These two explanations are not in fact opposed. Both assume that Creole formation involves retention of substrate grammar and selective adaptation of superstrate lexical items to express the functional categories of the Creole. We would argue that this is true of creoles in general, though there are significant differences in the degree of substrate as opposed to superstrate input found across these languages. This is why some creoles (e.g., Barbadian or Réunion Creole) closely resemble other cases of shift (untutored SLA) such as Hiberno English or Taiwanese Mandarin. Outcomes like these are fairly close approximations to their L2 targets, though they manifest some degree of substrate influence.

On the other hand, ‘radical’ creoles like those of Suriname involve such a high retention of substrate grammar that some have suggested that they are more closely related, genetically, to their substrates. Indeed, some creoles whose substrate input was largely homogeneous retain substrate functional categories as well as the morphemes that express them. Berbice Dutch is one such example (though it would be simplistic to claim that this Creole is a bilingual mixed language). Other ‘radical’ creoles such as Haitian derive their TMA categories and the forms that express them primarily from their superstrate, while allowing a significant degree of substrate influence as well.

7.3. Hypothesis 1. Retention of shared TMA categories.

As far as TMA is concerned, it seems clear that the particular categories retained in plantation creole were determined to a large extent by the degree of typological similarity in this area across the dominant substrates.

7.4. Hypothesis 2. Retention of shared syntactic strategies.

Similar explanations account for the similarities in the syntax of the verb phrase in Gbe and the Surinamese creoles. Recall the fact that the substrate languages, with few exceptions employ pre-verbal markers of tense and aspect, as well as negation and modality. These markers are easily isolatable and generally invariant, and the general character of the substrate verb complexes is periphrastic rather than synthetic. It is therefore not surprising that the Surinamese (and other New World) creoles should have adopted the same pattern of periphrastic preverbal expression of TMA categories. In some cases, similar patterns in the superstrate dialects would have reinforced this trend. The only exception to the use of pre-verbal markers in the creoles is the choice of a VP-final marker of Completive/Perfect, but again this has a model in the dominant Gbe substrate.

The ordering of preverbal auxiliaries in SN also matches that of its Gbe substrate to a significant degree. For instance, it is well known that SN, like other radical creoles, displays a Tense-Mood-Aspect order of auxiliaries (among others). This ordering has a model in the Gbe substrates. Jondoh (1980:52) informs us that, in Gengbe, "the order of constituents in AUX [INFL – DW] is generally, Tense, Modality, Aspect."

This is not to say that the structure of INFL in the Surinamese creoles is identical to that of Gengbe or other Gbe dialects. There are several significant differences, but space does not permit full discussion of them here.[5] Suffice it to say that much of the syntax of auxiliary ordering in the early Surinamese plantation Creole can be explained in terms of influence from the Gbe substrate. It is possible that Akan and Kikongo played some role as well, since they manifest some similarities to Gbe in their auxiliary combinations. It is also quite likely that many aspects of the syntax of INFL in the Surinamese creoles are due to innovations and internal developments in the course of the language's development. Future research will no doubt clarify this.

The facts outlined here support the hypothesis that the overall structure of the Surinamese Creole verb complex - the preference for periphrastic expression, the patterns of ordering and other syntactic properties of the auxiliaries - are patterned primarily after the dominant Gbe substrates.

7.5. Hypothesis 3: The selection of lexifier language forms

Now that we have established which substratal sources were most likely to have influenced the development of the tense/aspect categories of Sranan, we need at this point to consider possible explanations for the selection of specific forms to express these categories. As far as the choice of specific markers is concerned, the following in particular stand out:

• Choice of the unmarked verb to convey situations viewed as unanalyzed wholes, yielding a present interpretation with statives and a past interpretation with non-statives when the reference point is S.

• Choice of a form homophonous with a verb meaning 'go' to express futurity (Predictive and Prospective)

• Choice of an inflected form of 'be' to express Relative Past.

• Choice of a form homophonous with a locative copula to express progressive or imperfective meanings.

• Choice of a form homophonous with a verb meaning 'finish' to mark Completive/Perfect aspect.

• Choice of sa, probably derived from Dutch zal, as a marker of Potential Mood, including ability, possibility, expectation, etc.

For most of these choices we now have a more feasible explanation in terms of general principles that operate in contact situations generally. We argue here that the relevant constraints are quite similar to those that have been proposed for cases of SLA, particularly untutored SLA in cases of language shift.

To account for the reanalysis of L2 forms by learners under influence from their L1s, SLA researchers appeal to constraints such as Andersen's "Transfer to Somewhere Principle", which states in essence that "transfer" of features from an L1 will occur most readily when the L2 provides a model for it. According to this principle, L2 forms that have some resemblance in semantics and distribution to those which express L1 categories are most likely to be selected and in many cases reanalyzed in terms of the latter.

For instance, the choice of de (< English there) as a marker of Imperfective appears to be the result of an extension of the function of the copula de derived from English there. The copula de emerged in existential contexts due to an interlingual identification between the non-nominal copula in Gbe and the English locative adverbial there. Once the latter was reanalyzed as an existential/copula verb based on Gbe influence, it spread to all the contexts, including the expression of progressive aspect, in which its Gbe counterpart is used. This process seems to have also been driven by substratal influence (Migge 2002).

The choice of kaba as a marker of Completive/Perfect as well as a main verb meaning 'finish' in the creoles is another instance of calquing on a substrate category. Speakers of the early Surinamese plantation creole either adopted kaba directly from Portuguese or from second language, perhaps pidgin varieties of Portuguese employed by other Africans. They probably acquired it as a main verb. Once acquired, it also became a marker of Perfect/Completive aspect based on substrate patterns.

2 Conclusion.

Our investigation of TMA in the creoles of Suriname and Gbe shows that substrate influence must have played an important role in the formation of the plantation creole. Many of the TMA categories and strategies/lexical forms used to express them in the creoles have close counterparts in the main substratal input, the varieties of Gbe. The categories and strategies most likely emerged as the result of a process of interlingual association between structures in L2 varieties of English and equivalent structures in the slaves’ L1s. This is commonly found in contexts of ‘L2 learning’ in which the ‘learners’ have little access to the ‘target’ grammar.

The analysis, however, also revealed several differences between the creoles and the varieties of Gbe suggesting that other linguistic sources and mechanisms must have also contributed to the formation of the creoles of Suriname. It seems clear that European languages such as Portuguese and Dutch besides English varieties also had an impact on the plantation creole during the formative process and on its descendants in later periods. Language-internal change also played a role in the emergence of the plantation creole and particularly in the development of the TMA system of the modern varieties.

Products.

Publications and presentations.

The following publications and presentations are based on data collected in this project:

Publications:

Goury, Laurence & Migge, Bettina. 2003. Grammaire du nengee : Introduction aux langues aluku, ndyuka et pamaka. Collection Didactique. Editions IRD. (a user-friendy grammar of Ndjuka, Pamaka, Aluku for non-linguists).

Migge, Bettina & D. Winford. To appear. Gbe influence on the TMA systems of the Surinamese Creoles. To appear in N. Smith and P. Muysken (eds.). Transatlantic Sprachbund? Special issue of the Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages.

Winford, Donald. 2002. "A comparison of tense systems in Caribbean English creoles." In Pauline Christie (ed.) Due Respect A festschrift for Robert B. LePage.

Winford, Donald. 2002. TMA and creole typology. Occasional Paper 29, Society for Caribbean Linguistics. University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad.

Winford, Donald. To appear. The restructuring of tense/aspect in Creole formation and Second Language Acquisition. To appear in Janet Fuller (ed.) “A festschrift for Glenn Gilbert.

Conference presentations.

Migge, Bettina. 2003. Gbe influence on the modality systems of the Surinamese Creoles. Paper presented at the workshop on “Transatlantic Sprachbund?”, NIAS, Holland, April 2003.

Winford, Donald. 2002. Creole formation and Second Language Acquisition. Paper presented at the conference of the Society for Caribbean Linguistics, Trinidad, August 2002.

Winford, Donald. 2003. Restructuring in Creole Formation and Second Language Acquisition. Paper presented at the conference of the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, Atlanta, January 2003.

Winford, Donald. 2003. Gbe influence on the tense/aspect systems of the Surinamese Creoles. Paper presented at the workshop on “Transatlantic Sprachbund?”, NIAS, Holland, April 2003.

Winford, Donald. 2003. Commentary on relexification in Creole genesis. Paper presented at the workshop on “Transatlantic Sprachbund?”, NIAS, Holland, April 2003.

Winford, Donald. 2003. Sranan TMA and creole formation: A substratist perspective. Paper presented at the New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) conference, University of Pennsylvania, October 2003.

Data-base creation.

We have begun the creation of a large corpus of electronic versions of our transcriptions and translations of the data recorded in Benin and Suriname. Our intention is to expand this corpus and make it available via the Internet and/or CD-ROM. The Department of Linguistics at the Ohio State University fully supports this plan, and has offered its computer resources to implement it. The corpus can be made available, at least in part, within a year or two, if NSF is willing to assist with the funding.

Eventually, we hope to turn this corpus into a searchable database that can be accessed by all scholars conducting research on Gbe languages and the Surinamese Creoles. We will also attempt to make samples of the recorded speech itself available as part of this database. Toward these goals, all of the transcriptions of Sranan Tongo and most of those done for Gbe and Pamaka/Ndjuka have already been stored on computer. Most of the Sranan transcriptions have also been glossed and translated, but this remains to be fone for the Pamaka and Ndjuka ones. In addition, all of the tape recordings collected in a previous project on Sranan Tongo funded by NSF (SBR-9308635) have now been digitized and stored on CD as well as hard-drive.

Contributions.

This project promises to add much to our understanding of creole formation and its implications for broader issues involved in theories of language contact and its outcomes. Creole formation offers a rich testing ground for hypotheses concerning the relative contributions of internal and external factors in regulating these outcomes. The study will contribute eventually to a more comprehensive theory of contact-induced language change and language acquisition.

The data collected here will fill an enormous gap in the resources available for studying the Surinamese Creoles and their principal substrates, the Gbe languages. It is hoped that the electronic corpus we are preparing will provide a basis for continued research in this area.

The project has also provided training and practical experience for graduate students at the University of Benin, and The Ohio State University. The Gbe data also provide a rich resource for scholars working in Benin itself, especially at the Labo Gbe Institute in Garome, and for scholars working in French Guiana.

The work conducted by the co-PI, Bettina Migge in the Pamaka community, has helped raise awareness of the language situation there, and provided important input to ongoing efforts to greatly increase awareness of the language and culture of the Pamaka and Ndjuka communities among educators in French Guiana. In addition, she assisted in seminars that aim to provide bilingual teaching staff in French Guiana with a sound linguistic basis for introducing mother tongue education in primary and secondary schools in the west of French Guiana which is predominantly settled by Ndjuka and Pamaka speakers.

Our work has also helped raise awareness of issues of language policy and education for speakers of Sranan Tongo. The PI addressed a large audience of students and trainee teachers on these matters at the University of Suriname in July 2002. Dr. Robby Morroy, one of the Institute faculty, has expressed interest in further collaboration aimed in the first instance at providing a comprehensive sociolinguistic profile of Suriname.

References:

Aboh, Enoch Oladé. 1997. From the syntax of Gungbe to the grammar of Gbe. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Geneva.

Alleyne, Mervyn. 1971. Acculturation and the cultural matrix of creolization. Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, ed. by Dell Hymes, 169-86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

---, 1979. On the genesis of languages. The Genesis of Language (The first Michigan Colloquium, 1979). Ed. by Kenneth C. Hill, pp 89-107. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

---, 1980. Comparative Afro-American. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Arends, Jacques. 1989. Syntactic developments in Sranan: Creolization as a gradual process. Dissertation, University of Nijmegen.

Arends, Jacques. 1993. Towards a gradualist model of creolization. In Francis Byrne & John Holm (Eds.), Atlantic meets Pacific: A global view of pidginization and creolization, 371-380. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Arends, Jacques. 1994. De Afrikaanse wortels van de creooltalen van Suriname. Gramma/TTT 3, 115-128.

Arends, Jacques. 1995. Demographic factors in the formation of Sranan. In Arends (ed.), The early stages of creolization. pp 233-85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Arends, Jacques, Pieter Muysken & Norval Smith (Eds.). 1995. Pidgins and Creoles: An introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Avontolo, Aimé. 1992. AsPP et la catégorie INFL en FO~ngbe. The Journal of West African Languages 22:1.99-113.

Baker, Philip. 1982. On the origins of the first Mauritians and of the creole language of their descendants: A refutation of Chaudenson's 'Bourbonnais' theory. Isle de France Creole: Affinities and Origins, by Philip Baker and Chris Corne, 131-257. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Baker, Philip. 1995. Some developmental inferences from historical studies of pidgins and creoles. In Jacques Arends (Ed.) The early stages of creolization, 1-24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bickerton, Derek. 1974. Creolization, linguistic universals, natural semantax and the brain. Working Papers in Linguistics 6, 3 : 125-41. University of Hawaii.

Bickerton, Derek. 1981. Roots of language. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Bickerton, Derek. 1984. The Language Bioprogram Hypothesis. The Behavioural and Brain Sciences 7: 173-221.

Bickerton, Derek. 1988. Creole languages and the bioprogram. Linguistics: the Cambridge Survey, Vol. 2, ed. by Frederick J. Newmeyer, 268-84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bickerton, Derek. 1999. How to acquire language without positive evidence: what acquisitionists can learn from creoles. In Michel DeGraff (ed.) Language creation and language change: Creolization, Diachrony and Development 49-74. Cambridge Mass. The MIT press.

Binnick, Robert I. 1991. Time and the verb; A guide to tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boretzky, Norbert. 1983. On creole verb categories. Amsterdam Creole Studies 5: 1-24.

Bruyn, Adrienne. 1994. Some remarkable facts in Sranan. Paper presented at the conference of the Society for Caribbean Linguistics, Guyana, August 1994.

Bruyn, Adrienne. 1996. On identifying instances of grammaticalization in Creole languages. In Baker, P & A. Syea (eds.), Changing meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact languages (pp. 29-46). London: University of Westminster Press.

Bruyn, Adrienne. (1995a). Grammaticalization in creoles: The development of determiners and relative clauses in Sranan. Studies in language and language use, 21. Amsterdam: IFOTT.

Bybee, Joan L. & Östen Dahl. 1989. The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13,1: 51-103.

Bybee, Joan L., Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Capo, H. B .C. 1988. Renaissance du Gbe: Réflexions critiques et constructives sur l’Eve, le Fon, le Gen, l’Aja, le Gun, etc. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.

Chaudenson, 1996. Démystification de la relexification. Études Créoles XIX:1, 93-109.

Chung, Sandra & Alan Timberlake. 1985. Tense, mood and aspect. Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 3, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 202-58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

---, 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Corne, Chris. 1983. Substratal reflections: the completive aspect and the distributive numerals in Isle de France creole. Te Reo 26.65-80.

Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and Aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.

DeGraff, Michel. 1999. Epilogue. In Michel DeGraff (ed.) Language Creation and Language Change: Creolization, Diachrony and Development, 472-532. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Givón, Talmy. 1979. Prolegomena to any sane creology. Readings in creole studies, ed. by Ian F. Hancock, 3-35. Ghent: E.Story-Scientia.

Goodman, Morris. 1985. Review of Roots of Language, by Derek Bickerton. International Journal of American Linguistics 51.109-37.

Hoogbergen, Wim. 1990a. The history of the Suriname maroons. In G. Barna Shute (ed.) Resistance and rebellion in Suriname: Old and new, 65-102. Williamsburg: The College of William and Mary.

Hoogbergen, 1990b. Het verband tussen marronage en slavenopstanden in Suriname. SWI Forum 7, 28-60.

Huttar, George. 1985. Sources of Ndjuka African vocabulary. De Nieuwe West-Indische Gids 59, 45-71.

Huttar, George & Mary Huttar. 1994. Ndjuka. London: Routledge.

Hymes, Dell (ed.) 1971. Pidginization and creolization of languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jondoh, Edina E. A. 1980. Some aspects of the predicate phrase in Gbe. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.

Kay, P. & G. Sankoff. 1974. A language-universals approach to pidgins and creoles. Pidgins and Creoles: Current trends and prospects, ed. by David DeCamp & Ian F. Hancock, 61-72. Washington, DC, Georgetown University Press.

Kinyalolo, Kasangati K. W. 1992. A note on the progressive and prospective in FO~n. The Journal of West African Languages 22:1.35-51.

Laman, K.E. 1912. Grammar of the Kongo language (Kikongo). New York: The Christian Alliance Publishing Company.

Lefebvre, Claire. 1996. The tense, mood, and aspect system of Haitian Creole and the problem of transmission of grammar in creole genesis. JPCL 11:2, 231-311.

---- & John Lumsden. 1994. Relexification in creole genesis. Paper read at the MIT symposium on the role of relexification in creole genesis: the case of Haitian Creole.

Lumsden, John. 1999. Language acquisition and creolization. In Michel DeGraff (ed.) Language creation and language change: Creolization, Diachrony and Development 129-157. Cambridge Mass. The MIT press.

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Manning, Patrick. 1990. Slavery and African life: Occidental, Oriental and African slave trades. Cambridge University Press.

Matthews, Stephen. 1993. Creole aspect and morphological typology. Atlantic meets Pacific: A global view of pidginization and creolization, ed. by Francis Byrne and John Holm, 233-41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Migge Bettina. 1998a. Substrate influence in the formation of the Surinamese Plantation Creole: A consideration of sociohistorical and linguistic data from Ndyuka and Gbe. Ph.D Dissertation, Ohio State University.

Migge Bettina. 1998b. Substrate influence in creole formation: the origin of give-type serial verb constructions in the Surinamese plantation creole. JPCL 13:2, 215-265.

Migge, Bettina. 2000. The origin of the syntax and semantics of property items in the Surinamese plantation creole. In John McWhorter (ed.) Language Change and Language Contact in pidgins and creoles, 201-234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Mufwene, Salikoko. 1988. Formal evidence of pidginization/creolization in Kituba. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 10, 33-51.

Mufwene, Salikoko. 1990a. Transfer and the substrate hypothesis in Creolistics. Studies in Second Language Acquistion 12, 1-23.

Mufwene, Salikoko. 1990b. Time reference in Kikongo-Kituba. In John Singler (Ed.) Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect Systems, 97-117. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Mufwene, Salikoko. 1996a. The Founder Principle in creole genesis. Diachronica 13, 83-134.

Mufwene, Salikoko. 1996b. The development of American Englishes: Some questions from a creole genesis perspective. In Edgar Schneider (Ed.) Focus on the USA. Varieties of English Around the World, 231-264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Muysken, Pieter. 1981. Creole Tense/Mood/Aspect systems: the unmarked case? Generative Studies on Creole Languages, ed. by Pieter Muysken, 181-99. Dordrecht: Foris.

Palmer, 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pazzi, Robert. 1979. Introduction à l’histoire de l’aire culturelle ajatado. Études et documents en sciences humaines 1. Lomé, Togo: Université du Bénin, Institut National des Sciences de l’Education.

Roberts, Sarah J. 1998. The role of diffusion in the genesis of Hawaiian Creole. Language 74:1, 1-39.

Roberts, Sarah J. 2000. Nativization and the genesis of Hawai’ian Creole. In John McWhorter (ed.) Language Change and Language Contact in pidgins and creoles, 257-300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Siegel, Jeff. 1997. Mixing, Levelling and pidgin/creole development. In A. Spears & D. Winford (eds.) The structure and status of pidgins and creoles, pp. 111-149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Siegel, Jeff. 1999. Transfer constraints and substrate influence in Melanesian Pidgin. JPCL 14:1, 1-44.

Siegel, Jeff. 2000. Substrate influence in Hawai’I creole English. Language in Society 29, 197-236..

Singler, John. 1986. Short note. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 1: 141-45.

---, (ed.) 1990. Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

----, 1992. Nativization and pidgin/creole genesis: A reply to Bickerton. JPCL 7:319-33.

---, 1995. The demographics of creole genesis in the Caribbean: A comparison of Martinique and Haiti. The early stages of creolization, ed. by Jacques Arends, 203-232. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

---, 1996. Theories of creole genesis, sociohistorical considerations, and the evaluation of evidence: The case of Haitian Creole and the Relexification Hypothesis. JPCL 11:2, 185-230.

Smith, Carlotta S. 1991. The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht and Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Spears, Arthur. 1990. Tense, mood and aspect in the Haitian Creole preverbal marker system. Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect systems, ed. by John Singler, 119-42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Stolz, Thomas. 1987. The development of the AUX category in pidgins and creoles: The case of the Resultative-perfective and its relation to anteriority. Historical Development of Auxiliaries, ed. by Martin Harris & Paolo Ramat, 291-315. Berlin/Amsterdam/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Taylor, Douglas. 1963. The origin of West Indian creole languages: evidence from grammatical categories. American Anthropologist 65: 800-14.

----, 1971. Grammatical and lexical affinities of creoles. In Dell Hymes (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages, 293-296. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Traugott, Elizabeth. 1977. Pidginization, creolization and language change. In Albert Valdman (Ed.), Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, 70-98. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Thomason, Sarah Grey. 1993. On identifying the sources of creole structures: A discussion of Singler's and Lefebvre's papers. Africanisms in Afro-American language varieties, ed. by Salikoko Mufwene, 280-95. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

Thomason, Sarah G. & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Thompson, R. W. 1961. A note on some possible affinities between the creole dialects of the Old World and those of the New. In Robert B. LePage (Ed.), Creole Language Studies II 107-113. London: Macmillan.

Winford, Donald. 1993. Predication in Caribbean English Creoles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Winford, Donald. 1997. Property Items and Predication in Sranan. JPCL 21:2, 237-301.

Winford, Donald. 2000a. Tense and Aspect in Sranan and the creole prototype. In J. McWhorter (ed), Language Change and Language Contact in pidgins and creoles, 383-442. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Winford, Donald. 2000b. Irrealis in Sranan. Mood and modality in a radical creole. JPCL 15:1, 63-125.

Winford, Donald. Ms, forthcoming. Sranan TMA and substrate influence.

-----------------------

[1] Our Maxi informant provided only one example that seems to parallel the use of VP-final “finish” to express the sense of ‘already,’ in translating (E 97) as follows:

E 97.

(Un [2]"i a), e xa wema ey( fo ganji.

It think ? she read book this finish well

She s read the whole book.

[3]At this point we are not entirel∂i a), e xa wema ey( fo ganji.

It think ? she read book this finish well

‘She’s read the whole book.’

[4]At this point we are not entirely clear about the meanings of fo, ko, n( and m(.

[5] Though Lefebvre acknowledges that ∂ο∼ is analyzed by other scholars as a locative copula (e.g Anonymous 1983), she claims that it is best analyzed as a locative preposition (1996:269, note 10).

[6]In such contexts it seems to convey a stronger sense of prediction or expectation than o.

SN Alen sa kon.

Rain can come

‘Rain will (definitely) fall.’ (uttered as a threat.)

8. Jondoh points out that the future marker can precede the modal "can", but not "must" in Gengbe. In the Surinamese creoles, however, future o can precede both modals. Also, they allow TMA combinations with Relative Past ben, whereas Gengbe has no preverbal past marker.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download