The Creole linguistic communication that will be considered during this essay will be Mauritanian Creole. Mauritius is found of the African continent, in the south West of the Indian ocean. This island was visited by the Portuguese in the early sixteenth Century, and by the Dutch in the seventeenth Century. They were the 1s whom foremost for good settled at that place, nevertheless due to certain conditions on the island, such as the conditions conditions which they could non accommodate to, caused them to go forth some old ages subsequently. At this clip, the Gallic were governing the island near Mauritius, which is called la Reunion, and hence saw this as an advantage and took control of Mauritius in the eighteenth Century, and as a consequence it was under the Gallic regulation. The Gallic started importing slaves from different countries, such as East and West Africa, India and Madagascar and grew in Numberss rather quickly. They settled on the island utilizing a Creole as a agency of communicating. Due to the addition in the Numberss of slaves, the European population diminished, which caused the Creole linguistic communication to spread out. Some clip subsequently during the Napoleon war Britain took over, which meant that English became the linguistic communication of the authorities and besides instruction. However, French was still the linguistic communication used in other spheres, but Creole was used the most.
At the minute the population of Mauritius is about 1.2 million, whom all speak the Creole linguistic communication, even though it has been known that English is the official linguistic communication. In A.Richards book, he states that English is non the preferable linguistic communication regardless of the fact that it has a colonial yesteryear on the island and that “ beyond school and work it is seldom used. ” He adds that, “ the official linguistic communication of Mauritius is English, although most Mauritians are more comfy speech production French. The linguistic communication of the people, nevertheless, is Creole. ” ( A.Richards, R.Ellis, D.Shuurman P21 )
Although Creole is spoken by the bulk of its dwellers, “ people who want to mount the societal ladder ” are now taking French or English. “ This fact proves once more the sociological content of pidgins and Creoles. In most countries they are spoken by the lower categories and abandoned every bit shortly as a individual aspires to a higher place in society. ” ( M.K Adler P54 ) In existent fact, the pidgins of Atlantic Ocean and Indian Ocean countries all have “ connexions with each other through European colonization and the bondage system. ” ( M.Sebba P169 )
First the term ‘Creole ‘ will be taken into consideration, in order to acquire a better apprehension of what will be explained. “ This term has been appropriated by linguists to depict a peculiar group of linguistic communications spoken non merely by Black populations in and around the Caribbean, but in many other locations world-wide. ” ( H.Nwenmely P15 ) When people from different beginnings came together, the lone manner they could pass on would be with simple vocabulary and grammar. Therefore, pidgin as a linguistic communication was used, until it was spread outing and hence ensuing in Creole which, “ consequences fulfils all the communicating demands of its talkers but, while the vocabulary is drawn from the dominant linguistic communication, the constructions which it uses are frequently really different, and, in many instances, derive from the subsidiary linguistic communications. ” ( H.Nwenmely P16 )
Let us analyze the connexion between Creole and pidgin linguistic communication. It can be said that there exists a strong nexus between Creole and pidgin because if the original linguistic communication that is spoken by the native talkers is a pidgin, it has been nativised. In other words, it has become a Creole linguistic communication. “ The thought that Creole linguistic communications are nativised pidgins emerged during the late 1960ss and developed in the 1970ss. ” ( C.Lefebvre P14 ) Normally, a Creole becomes more complex and refined than a pidgin, which so consequences in “ its vocabulary expands, its grammar stabilises and its pronunciation becomes more fixed ” . ( M.K Adler P14 ) Harmonizing to C.Lefebvre, “ Creoles can emerge quickly, in this instance in one coevals ” ( P15 ) Pidgins are known to be more of a 2nd linguistic communication, in other words a linguistic communication which is learnt throughout coevalss, whilst Creole is developed by kids as a native linguistic communication. Therefore, pidgins are “ contact languages without native talkers, ” whilst Creoles are “ contact languages with native talkers. ” ( M.Sebba P169 )
However we need to retrieve that even though pidgins and Creoles are different, they both ‘share structural characteristics such as grammatical simpleness and little vocabularies when compared with their lexifiers ‘ . ( M.Sebba P168 ) In general, Mauritanian Creole is an easy linguistic communication to be learnt as “ there are no grammatical regulations ” and “ English, Gallic and Indian words can be adapted by “ Creolising ” them. ” ( A.Richards, R.Ellis, D.Shuurman P21 ) Therefore, the talker can use the linguistic communication to pass on in a non-structured manner, whereby the manner of speech production, vocabulary, syntax, phonemics or grammatical constructions can be every bit good and every bit acceptable as any other linguistic communication, as it is besides “ non formalized and as such does non hold a dictionary. ” ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www.economicexpert.com/a/Mauritian: Creole.htm )
One chief lingual characteristic which can be examined in the Mauritanian Creole, is the lexifier. “ Where a individual linguistic communication is identified as the beginning of the bulk of the vocabulary of a pidgin or Creole, it is known as the lexifieraˆ¦the lexifier frequently equates with the European colonizer ‘s linguistic communication where there is one. ” ( M.Sebba P25 ) This linguistic communication contains many words from the Gallic linguistic communication, but harmonizing to Sebba, she states that “ Baker ( 1972 ) notes that more than 150 words are derived from English, more than 50 from Indian linguistic communications and several from Malagasy and Chinese. ” ( M.Sebba P144 ) . It is possible to state that many words clearly origin from the Gallic words but in the Creole vocabulary, for illustration the Gallic ‘le, La, cubic decimeter ‘ is normally connected with the noun it affects. Furthermore in French, articles are often joined with the preposition ‘de ‘ . However, in Mauritanian Creole, the sound which is produced can doubtless be reflected into a individual word. Examples of this could be ‘le motley ‘ in French, which in English means pes, becomes ‘lipye ‘ in Mauritanian Creole. Furthermore, de l’eau intending H2O in English, becomes ‘dilo ‘ in Mauritanian Creole. As we can see, the articles which exist in the Gallic linguistic communication, ‘le ‘ and ‘la ‘ becomes portion of the existent word itself. Nevertheless, some words that exist have wholly changed their significances. One illustration would be “ gayh ” , which means “ to hold something ” in Mauritian, which originally comes from the Gallic word “ gagner ” , intending “ to win something. ”
Phonology is another facet which can be examined. This term can be described as the survey of sounds, and in this instance, the survey of the sound system of Mauritanian Creole. Phonology can be linked with the variety meats of address ( roof of the mouths, alveolar ridge ) and how it is used, and besides it can intend the characteristics of sound, for illustration speech patterns and modulation. The sound system for Mauritanian Creole is really similar to French, nevertheless it still has some obvious differences. This can be said as “ the Creole does non hold some of the more deeper and rounded consonants that the Gallic does. For illustration, trough ( eat ) in Creole is written manzer and is spoken the same as the Gallic, with the exclusion that the more rounded g sound in the Gallic is flattened to sound like the s in the English word “ vision ” . ” ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www.economicexpert.com/a/Mauritian: Creole.htm ) Another facet which can be recognised is the rounded vowels which exist, such as “ U ” and “ EU ” that are pronounced as “ I ” , “ U ” , “ Tocopherol ” and “ O ” , which in French are normally pronounced as “ U ” and “ EU ” . Another dramatic illustration would be “ among the many phonological regularities in the derivation of Mauritanian Creole words from French is the undermentioned tidy rule: Gallic nasal vowels remain nasalaˆ¦but when the French is followed by a word concluding voiced stop consonant ( vitamin D, B, or g ) the concluding stop consonant is dropped, the MC vowel is denasalised ” and “ m, N and ng becomes a aggressively marked consonant. ” ( Seuren P100-101 ) The Mauritanian writing system besides by and large follows Gallic, but some soundless letters are non taken into history, which cuts the figure of ways in which the same word can be spelt.
The vocabulary, in other words, the words or phrases used in Mauritanian Creole is interesting to analyze. M.Vaughan investigates the linguistic communication ‘s slave roots. Harmonizing to her, the linguist and folklorist Charles Baissac reports how Creole uses “ guetter ” ( to look for ) alternatively of “ regarder ” ( expression ) . Similarly, “ roder ” ( to prowl ) means “ chercher ” ( to seek in French ) .
Nouns are besides of import in Mauritanian Creole as they do non alter when they are pluralised. As a effect, whether a noun is remarkable or plural can merely be verified by the context. For illustration, the word “ prohibition ” is put before the noun in order to alter the sentence to the plural signifier, “ prohibition dimoune ” intending those people, whilst “ dimoune ” on its ain would intend people. Even though the Gallic “ un/une ” is tantamount to the Mauritanian “ en ” , the manner in which it can be used is different. In Creole the article “ La ” is used, nevertheless it is placed after the noun it changes. In Gallic you would state, “ un confab ” , “ lupus erythematosus confab ” , “ les confabs ” , whilst in Mauritian you would state “ en confab ” , “ chats-la ” , ban-chats. ”
Whether or non the pronoun is the topic, object, genitive, male or female, there is merely one word which is used to depict these. This word is “ fifty-one ” , which can be used to depict he, she, him, her, it or hers.
There are besides words which are used in sentences to bespeak the tenses. For past tense, the word “ Ti ” is used before the action, “ five ” is used to tag the perfect tense, and “ Virginia ” for future.
The sentence structure of Mauritanian Creole, particularly the usage of their inquiry words is besides interesting to observe, which DeGraff explains in his book. The manner in which Creole contrasts with both the English and Gallic linguistic communication is that it does non hold a “ subject-auxiliary inversion in connexion with wh-movement. ” ( DeGraff P78 ) For illustration, if we straight translate the phrase “ ki u ule fer dinmen? “ , it would be “ what you want do tomorrow? “ , and in idiomatic English, “ what do you desire to make tomorrow? ” ( P78 ) Another illustration would be, “ kan nu Ti fer field-effect transistor La? “ , straight intending “ when we TNS make party DET? ” and in idiomatic English, “ when did we have the party? ” ( P78 ) DeGraff continues to notice that “ most inquiry words are created in Mauritanian Creole by prefixing ‘ki ‘ to nouns of clip, topographic point, manner and so on, which are drawn from the Gallic vocabulary. ” ( DeGraff P78 ) He so follows on by explicating “ such a bio morphemic manner of organizing wh-words appears to be typical for Creole linguistic communications. ” ( DeGraff P78 )
On the other manus, while it seems that some structural elements of Mauritanian Creole are typical of Creoles in general, it is of import to observe that Mauritanian Creole is non wholly typical of Creole linguistic communications. We can take H.Wekker ‘s sentiment on this when he remarks that typically “ creolization is best described as a gradual procedure of linguistic communication formation, affecting a period of bilingualism in which substrate characteristics will be transmitted. ” ( Wekker, H P140 ) He besides discusses about “ disconnected creolization ” as a manner for development when there is “ highly limited entree ” to the chief linguistic communication, but that this mode of development of a Creole linguistic communication is “ the exclusion instead than the regulation. ” ( P141 ) However, we can see that harmonizing to some theoreticians, Mauritanian Creole is a perfect illustration of this sort of disconnected creolisation, whereby the linguistic communication is a “ extremist Creole. ” ( DeGraff P77 ) . As a affair of fact in Sebba ‘s book, she discusses how in 1773, it was stated in a newspaper advertizement how a lost slave did non understand the Creole linguistic communication. This therefore indicates that twenty two old ages after the slaves were foremost imported to Mauritius, “ an identifiable local linguistic communication had developed, ” ( Sebba P142 ) which caused the slaves trouble in groking. Without a uncertainty, this means that it can be said that this linguistic communication is non basically typical of the Creole linguistic communications in general as Mauritanian Creole seemed to hold developed really rapidly and non needfully derived from a pidgin linguistic communication. Baker and Corne besides suggest this in their book, as they believe that Mauritanian Creole originated on the island of Mauritius between the old ages of 1727 and 1738, without of all time holding any connexions with the pidgin languages. Furthermore, they suggest that it was the slave kids who created the Mauritanian Creole, as when they were born in Mauritius, they outnumbered the white colonists. On the other manus of this suggestion, Richard says “ it evolved from the pidgin used by the Gallic Masterss of the eighteenth Century to pass on with their slaves or their Masterss who invented the Creole linguistic communication. ” ( A.Richards, R.Ellis, D.Shuurman P21 ) Therefore there is an statement which concerns to whether or non it was the slaves or their Masterss whom created and developed the Mauritanian Creole. The fact that Mauritanian Creole lacks the pidgin linguistic communication, it makes it unusual and harmonizing to Wekker, it is hence rather an “ exceeding ” linguistic communication. ( Wekker P141 )