IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif



Though productive serialization must be universally available to all natural
languages, accidental serialization seems to be much more frequent. Non productive
accidental verb serialization as it occurs in Arawakan and Romance languages is more
prone to grammaticalization, probably because of a factor of "saliency". Alemanic
dialects, for example, developed serial uses of GO which grammaticalized rather
rapidly into categorial uses remindful of prepositions and adverbs.

(29)ix däd go ge Eshinge ge shaffe go
[I would GO GO Donaueschingen GO work GO]
"I might as well go to work in Donaueschingen"

Prepositional uses of verbs in the non-French atlantic creoles seem to me due to
accidental serialization, not to an earlier state where verb serialization was
productive in the sense of a process available to all verbs in the lexicon.


To wrap it up, what is abnormal transmission? A question of this nature can only be
answered within the framework of a theory of glottogenetics.

Glottogenetics is that part of historical linguistics that concerns itself with the
developmental and evolutionary aspects of language genesis (cf. Wittmann 1980). This
includes not only the question of the ultimate origin of natural language but also
investigating claims of alleged genesis of "new" languages from old.

If linguistic ontogenesis is the learning/acquisition of first and second languages
as seen in individual speakers, children and adults, linguistic phylogenesis is the
resulting evolution seen through time. The impact of the individual speaker in the
transmission of language is not predictable in any quantum-oriented way, the impact
of masses of individual speakers is interpretable phylogenetically. Natural
phylogenesis will tend to be regular as to the change and gradual as to the diffusion
of that change. Cases were changes seemingly lack regularity AND gradualness of
diffusion are conceivable cases of glottogenesis. Cases of conceivable glottogenesis
arise in two particular situations of language contact.

In situations of changing linguistic loyalty where substrate languages are giving way
to a superstrate language, the transmission of the superstrate languageMAYgive
rise to a stable pidgin the syntactic make-up of which cannot be explained clearly as
the phylogenetic outcome of either substrate or superstrate. In time, such a pidgin
may become nativized through first language acquisition in the speech of monolingual
speakers. A clear case of a non-nativized pidgin is Nigerian Pidgin English (also
spoken in parts of Cameroon where nativization is clearly incipient) and a clear case
of a nativized pidgin is Tok Pisin (superstrate vocabulary borrowed from English,
substrate vocabulary from various native languages of Papua). Nativized pidgins,
inappropriately called creoles, borrow their vocabulary to a greater extent from the
superstrate language though the resyntactification cannot be shown to derive clearly
in most cases from any substrate input. Such "new" languages, in their turn, are
subject to regular phylogenesis and are typologically indistinguishable from "old"
languages. The koine-creole differences of colonial French obviously cannot result
from such a renewal process though the original koine of the 17th century clearly is
a resyntactified version of Gallo-Romance (Wittmann 1995).

In situations where language loyalties are maintained, pressures from the dominant
target languageMAYgive rise to relexified varieties of the source language along
lines constrained by variables inherent in relexification (the syntactic markers of
the source language must be maintained to a significant extent in a phonetic shape
derived from the source language;cf. Muysken & Smith 1990, Wittmann 1992, Wittmann
& Fournier 1996). Clear cases resulting from a relexification process are Media
Lengua, Mitchif and Karipuna. Varieties of creole French cannot be considered to be
the outcome of a relexified variety of Gbe as has been claimed in some literature
(Lefebvre & Lumsden 1994b with frequent remakes therafter in the Journal of Pidgin
and Creole Languages and elesewhere):

(A) Creole French does not maintain overtly any of the syntactic markers of Gbe
(Muysken & Smith 1990, Wittmann 1992, Wittmann & Fournier 1994, 1996, DeGraff 2001);

IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif


Printed for Henri Wittmann <>

IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif



(B) Common underlying properties of syntax established in the comparative framework
of generative grammar reflect the fundamental unity of the workings of principles and
parameters of Universal Grammar, not the workings of relexification processes
(Wittmann & Fournier 1994, 1996);

(C) In the comparative framework of (B), Magoua turns out to be syntactically more
closely related to Gbe than Haitian Creole or any other variety of creole French
(Wittmann 1995, Wittmann & Fournier 1994, 1996);Conversely stated, the typological
correspondances of Haitian Creole and Gbe are crucially overrated and the frills of
Haitian in this respect are skillfully weeded out (Wittmann 1987b, Wittmann &
Fournier 1996, DeGraff 1999, 2000, 2001)

(D) Core data used in comparing Haitian Creole and Gbe are controversial and
notoriously unreliable (Wittmann & Fournier 1994, 1996, Degraff 1999, 2000, 2001).

(E) The hypothesis is crucially dependant on differences beween Haitian Creole and
French. The only published evidence available for scrutiny (Lefebvre & Lumsden
1994a) demonstrates beyond any doubt that their comparison is biased in favor of a
systematic exploitation of the frills of Standard French (Wittmann 1998b) though the
principal investigator is a native speaker of a non-standard koine variety of
colonial French. The conspicuous absence of koine data from their comparison raises
questions of ethics that I think couldn't have been raised, for very obvious reasons,
elsewhere in this paper.

If I don't pursue any further, it's mostly because so far on this list nobody has
come out seriously in defense of any of their hypotheses.

In any event, varieties of creole French don't qualify as outcomes from glottogenetic
processes on any count. Innovations and a few instances of substratal input set
apart, creole French is for the most part a natural product capitalizing on the
frills of a pre-existing drastically restructured koine. The extent to which the
pre-existing koine is something "new" out of "old" is open to another debate.


BAKER, Philip. 1984. "Agglutinated French articles in Creole French:their
evolutionary significance."Te Reo 27.89-129.

BAUCHE, Henri (1920). Le langage populaire de Paris. Paris:Payot.

CALVET, Louis-Jean (ed.). 1994a. Créolistique et grammaire générative. Paris:
Sorbonne, Lab. de sociolinguistique (Plurilinguismes 8).

CLAPIN, Sylva. 1894. Dictionnnaire canadien-français. Montréal:Beauchemin.

DEGRAFF, Michel A.F. 1995. "On certain differences between Haitian and French
predicative constructions."Contemporary Research in Romance linguistics, ed. J.
Amastae et al., 237-56. Amsterdam:Benjamins.

DEGRAFF, Michel. 1999. "Empirical quicksand:Probing two recent articles on
Haitian Creole."Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 14.359-70.

DEGRAFF, Michel. 2000. "Morphology in creole genesis."Ken Hale:A life in
Language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, preprint. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press, to appear.

DEGRAFF, Michel. 2001. "Against creole genesis as 'abnormal transmission'."LSA
paper, Washington, DC, PDF document, Jan. 6, 2001.

DRAPEAU, Lynn. 1982. "Les paradigmes sontaient-tu régularisé?"La syntaxe comparé
du français standard et populaire, ed. Claire Lefebvre, 2.127-47. Québec:Office de
la Langue Française.

FLUTRE, Louis-Fernand. 1977. Du moyen picard au picard moderne. Amiens:Musée de

IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif


Printed for Henri Wittmann <>

IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif



FOURNIER, Robert. 1994. "L'Ouest français dans le français des Amériques:
l'isoglossisme du créole caraïbe."L'Ouest français et la francophonie
nord-américaine:actes du Colloque international de la francophonie tenu à Angers du
26 au 29 mai 1994, ed. G. Cesbron, 149-54. Angers:Presses de l'Université
d'Angers, 1996.

FOURNIER, Robert. 1998. "Des créolismes dans la distribution des déterminants et
des complémenteurs en français québécois basilectal."Français d'Amérique:
variation, créolisation, normalisation (Actes du colloque, Université d'Avignon, 8-11
oct. 1996), ed. Patrice Brasseur, 217-28. Avignon:Université d'Avignon, Centre
d'études canadiennes.

GLOSSAIRE = Société du Parler français au Canada. 1930. Glossaire du parler
français au Canada. Québec:Action sociale.

GUMPERZ, John J. & Robert WILSON. 1971. "Convergence and creolization:A case from
the Indo-Aryan/Dravidian border in India."Pidginization and creolization of
languages, ed. Dell Hymes, 151-67. Cambridge:University Press.

HIGHFIELD, Arnold. The French dialect of St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Ann

HYMAN, Larry. 1975. "On the change from SOV to SVO:Evidence from Niger-Congo."
Word order and word order change, ed. Charles N. Li, 113-47. Austin:University of
Texas Press.

JAKOBSON, Roman. 1931. "Über die phonologischen Sprachbünde."Travaux du Cercle
linguistique de Prague 4.234-40. [P. 234:Jakobson credits Trubetskoy with the
"terminology accepted at the Congress held at The Hague" in 1928.]

JAKOBSON, Roman. 1938. "Sur la théorie des affinités phonologiques des langues."
Proceedings of the International Congress of Linguists 4.48-58. Copenhagen.

LABOV, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change: I. Internal factors.
Cambridge, MA:Blackwell.

LACHARTÉ, Darlene & Jean WELLINGTON. 1999. "Passive in Jamaican Creole:
Phonetically empty but syntactically active."Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages

LAFAGE, Suzanne. 1976. Français écrit et parlé en pays éwé. Dissertation,
Université de Nice (Published 1985, Paris: SÉLAF).

LARSON, R. 1988. "On the double object construction."Linguistic Inquiry

LEFEBVRE, Claire & John S. Lumsden. 1994a. "Des différences entre le créole haïtien
et le français." Espace créole 8: français-créole créole-français, ed. R. Damoiseau
& P. Pinalie, 189-207. Paris: L'Harmattan.

LEFEBVRE, Claire & John S. Lumsden. 1994b. "Le rôle central de la relexification
dans la genèse des langues créoles."Calvet 1994:47-93.

MANESSY, Gabriel. 1983. "Bantu et créole:l'agglutination de l'article français."
Afrique et langage 20:2.17-28.

McLAUGLIN, Anne. 1986. "Une (autre) analyse de la distribution des variantes des
voyelles hautes en français montréalais."Revue québécoise de linguistique théorique
et appliquée 5:4.21-60.

McWHORTER, John H. 1998. "Identifiying the creole prototype:Vindicating a
typological class."Language 74.788-818.

MUYSKEN, Pieter & Norval SMITH. 1990. "Question words in pidgin and creole
languages."Linguistics 28:4.883-903.

NDAYIRAGIJE, Juvénal. 1989. "La source du déterminant agglutiné en créole haïtien."

IMAGE 01h2LexDiffFin01.gif


Printed for Henri Wittmann <>

[made with GoClick]