Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T23:21:22.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replication, transfer, and calquing: Using variation as a tool in the study of language contact

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2009

Miriam Meyerhoff
Miriam Meyerhoff
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Do the processes of replication, transfer, and calquing operate on speakers' mental organization of variables? Can the comparison of constraint rankings across languages provide evidence for (or against) the transfer of features in cases of long-term language contact? This article suggests yes to both questions. It undertakes a comparison of constraint rankings on null subjects and null objects in a corpus of Bislama and a corpus of Tamambo narratives to demonstrate the potential and limitations of such methods. It concludes that these methods: (i) allow us to particularize our definitions of replication, transfer, and calquing to inherently variable domains, and (ii) strengthen connections between variationist sociolinguistics and the fields of creolistics and language contact.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , October 2009 , pp. 297 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Blondeau, Hélène, & Nagy, Naomi. (2008). Subordinate clause marking in Montreal Anglophone French and English. In Meyerhoff, M. & Nagy, N. (eds.), Social lives in language: Sociolinguistics and multilingual speech communities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 273–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britain, David. (2008). When is a change not a change? A case study on the dialect origins of New Zealand English. Language Variation and Change 20(2):187–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britain, David, & Trudgill, Peter. (2005). New dialect formation and contact-induced reallocation: Three case studies from the English Fens. International Journal of English Studies 5(1):183–209.Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle. (2008). The localization of global linguistic variants. English World-Wide 29(1):15–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle, & D'Arcy, Alexandra. (2009). Localized globalization: A multi-local, multivariate investigation of quotative be like. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13(3):291–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burridge, Kate. (1995). Evidence of grammaticalization in Pennsylvania German. In Andersen, H. (ed.), Historical linguistics 1993: Selected papers from the 11th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camden, William G. (1979). Parallels in the structure and lexicon and syntax between New Hebrides Bislama and the South Santo language spoken at Tangoa. Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, No. 2 (Pacific Linguistics, A–57). Canberra: Australian National University. 51–117.Google Scholar
Cotter, Colleen. (1994). Focus in Irish and English: Contrast and contact. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20:134–144.Google Scholar
Crowley, Terry. (1990). From Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The emergence of a national language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowley, Terry. (2004). The transfer of fuzzy categories: Grammatical variability and animacy in Bislama. Paper presented at Montreal Dialogues: Workshop on SLA and Creole languages. University of Montreal.Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K., Hedberg, Nancy, & Zacharski, Ron. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69(2):274–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. (1993). The quantitative analysis of linguistic variation. In Preston, D. (ed.), American dialect research. Amsterdam : John Benjamins. 223–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, & Kuteva, Tania. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hock, Hans Heinrich. (1992). A note on English and modern Sanskrit. World Englishes 11 (2/3):163–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jauncey, Dorothy. (1997). A grammar of Tamambo. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Jauncey, Dorothy. (2002). Tamabo. In Lynch, J., Ross, M., & Crowley, T. (eds.), The Oceanic languages. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon. 608–625.Google Scholar
Jaegli, Osvaldo, & Safir, Ken. (eds.). (1989). The null subject parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keesing, Roger M. (1988). Melanesian Pidgin and the Oceanic substrate. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerswill, Paul, & Williams, Ann. (2005). New towns and koineization: Linguistic and social correlates. Linguistics 43(5):1023–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Ruth. (2008). Chiac in context: Overview and evaluation of Acadie's Joual. In Meyerhoff, M. & Nagy, N. (eds.), Social lives in language: Sociolinguistics and multilingual speech communities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 137–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koptjevskaya-Tamm, Maria, & Wälchli, Bernhard. (2001). The Circum-Baltic languages: An areal-typological approach. In Dahl, Ö. & Koptjevskaya-Tamm, M. (eds.), Circum-Baltic languages: Typology and contact. Vol. II: Grammar and typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 615–750.Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B., & Tabouret-Keller, Andrée. (1985). Acts of identity: Creole-based approaches to language and ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron. (2000). Fusion and the cognitive basis for bilingual discourse markers. International Journal of Bilingualism 4(4):505–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (1996). Transitive marking in contact Englishes. Australian Journal of Linguistics 16(1):57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (2000). The emergence of creole subject-verb agreement and the licensing of null subjects. Language Variation and Change 12(2):203–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (2001). Another look at the typology of serial verb constructions: The grammaticalization of temporal relations in Bislama (Vanuatu). Oceanic Linguistics 40:247–268.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (2003). Formal and cultural constraints on optional objects in Bislama. Language Variation and Change 14(3):323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (2008). Aspects of the language spoken at Matantas, Big Bay (Vanuatu). Unpublished manuscript, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam. (2009). Animacy in Bislama? Using quantitative methods to evaluate transfer of a substrate feature. In Stanford, J. & Preston, D. (eds.), Variation in indigenous minority languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 369–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam, & Niedzielski, Nancy. (2003). The globalisation of vernacular variation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(4):534–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam, & Walker, James A. (2007). The persistence of variation in individual grammars: Copula absence in “urban sojourners” and their stay-at-home peers, Bequia (St Vincent and the Grenadines). Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(3):346–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, Miriam, & Walker, James A. (2009). Variation in the use of existentials on Bequia (St Vincent & the Grenadines). Paper presented at the Eighth Creolistics Workshop. Justus-Liebig-Universität, Gießen.Google Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. (1996). The founder principle in creole genesis. Diachronica 13:83–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. (2001). The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naro, Anthony, & PereiraScherre, Maria Marta Scherre, Maria Marta. (2000). Variable concord in Portuguese: The situation in Brazil and Portugal. In McWhorter, J. (ed.), Language change and language contact in pidgins and creoles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 235–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana. (ed.) (2000). The English history of African American English. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana, & Malvar, Elisabete. (2006). Modelling linguistic change: The past and the present of the future in Brazilian Portuguese. In Hinskens, F. (ed.), Language variation: European perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 169–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana, & Tagliamonte, Sali. (2001). African American English in the diaspora. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Roberts, Sarah J. (2000). Nativization and the genesis of Hawaiian Creole. In McWhorter, J. (ed.), Language change and language contact in pidgins and creoles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 257–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, David, Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Smith, E. (2005). Goldvarb X: A variable rule application for Macintosh and Windows. Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian. (1993). Focus in Tok Pisin. In Byrne, F. & Winford, D. (eds.), Focus and grammatical relations in creole languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 117–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian. (1994). An historical and evolutionary approach to variation in the Tok Pisin verb phrase. Parasession on Variation and Linguistic Theory: Chicago Linguistic Society 30:293–320.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian, & Brown, Penelope. (1976). The origins of syntax in discourse: A case study of Tok Pisin relatives. Language 52(3):631–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian, & Mazzie, Claudia. (1991). Determining noun phrases in Tok Pisin. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 6:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, Jeff. (1999). Transfer constraints and substrate transfer in Melanesian Pidgin. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 14:1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Geoff P. (2002). Growing up with Tok Pisin: Contact, creolization and change in Papua New Guinea's national language. London: Battlebridge Publications.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. (2002). Comparative sociolinguistics. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., & Schilling-Estes, N. (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell. 729–763.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey, & Kaufman, Terrence. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. (1986). Dialects in contact. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. (2004). New dialect formation: The inevitability of colonial Englishes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Turell, M. Teresa. (1998). The sociolinguistic situation of the British and US American communities in Spain. Links and Letters 5:193–200.Google Scholar
Winford, Donald. (2003). An introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar