[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
creoles
- To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
- Subject: creoles
- From: CJ FINE <cbmvax!uunet!BRADFORD.AC.UK!C.J.Fine>
- In-Reply-To: <no.id>; from "Logical Language Group" at May 20, 92 4:35 pm
- Reply-To: CJ FINE <cbmvax!uunet!BRADFORD.AC.UK!C.J.Fine>
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!uga.cc.uga.edu!LOJBAN>
Lojbab quoth:
> Now the fact that Esperanto norms are NOT determined by native-born speakers
> is therefore precisely why such linguists do not consider Esperanto a true
> language yet, as opposed to a creole (which is precisely an amalgamated
> language spoken by adults of differing native language backgrounds for
> mutual communication). There are some linguists, but very few, who study
> creoles, and the creolization process whereby a creole spoken as the dominant
> tongue in a region becomes a true language because that becomes the language
> that adults teach their children. These linguists tend to study those
> processes, not the adult speaking norms, which as I've said are not
> 'interesting' because they are likely to be uninstinctive in nature and hence
> not reminiscent of pure linguistic behavior.
I believe that what you've described as a 'creole' is more often termed
a 'pidgin'. Creolization is when the pidgin does start to be the native
language of a new generation, and thus becomes a creole.
va'o I agree with Edmund on computer languages, and indeed in general on
his categorisation.
kolin