The Morphosyntax of Spanish-lexified Creoles

The Morphosyntax of Spanish-fexified Creoles

Gerardo A. Lorenzmo

LINCOM Studies in Pidgin & Creole Linguistics

In this series

01 Gerardo A. Lorenzino

The Angolar Creole Portuguese

02 Gerardo A. Lorenzino

The Morphosyntax of Spanish-lexified Creoles

The Morphosyntax of Spanish-lexified Creoles

Gerardo A. Lorenzino

2000 LINCOM EUROPA

Published by LINCOM EUROPA 2000.

All correspondence concerning LINCOM Studies in Pidgin & Creole Linguistics should be addressed to:

LINCOM EUROPA Freibadstr. 3 D-81543 Muenchen [email protected] http://home.t-online.de/home/LINCOM.EUROPA

All rights reserved, including the rights of translation into any foreign language. No part of this book may be reproduced in any way without the permission of the publisher.

Printed in E.C. Printed on chlorine-free paper

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP Cataloguing-in-Publication-Data A catalogue record for this publication is available from Die Deutsche Bibliothek (http://www.ddb.de)

ISBN 3 89586 781 0

The Morphosyntax of Spanish-lexified Creoles Abstract

This study presents a morphosyntactic comparison of the three Spanish-lexified creóles, namely, Palenquero (Colombia), Papiamentu (Netherlands Antilles) and Chabacano (Philippines). The three main chapters examine the most salient morphosyntactic features in the noun phrase, verb phrase and sentence structure of the three Spanish-lexified creóles.

A comparative overview for each morphosyntactic

feature will be presented after their separate analysis in Palenquero, Papiamentu and Chabacano, respectively. The assessment of the Spanish-lexified creóles' morphosyntactic similarities and differences will hopefully further our understanding of the kinds of developmental processes which led to the formation of the three Spanish-lexified creóles. In this respect, some features of Palenquero, Papiamentu and Chabacano are difficult to explain without referring to their African (Palenquero, Papiamentu) and Austronesian (Chabacano) component, respectively. For example, aside from the shared features from Spanish, Chabacano can be expected to have distinct features due to its distinct Austronesian substrates such as Tagalog and Visayan languages.

Despite the

essentially descriptive approach followed in this linguistic study, there will be frequent references to diachronic constraints and data from other creóles (both Atlantiic and Pacific) in order to suggest some parallelisms between Palenquero and Papiamentu, on one hand, and Chabacano, on the other.

1 CONTENTS

11st of abbreviations

3

I iHt of tables

4

I ist of figures 1.0

Introduction

'? 0 2.1. 2.2. 2.3.

Sociohistorical background Palanquero (Colombia) Papiamentu (Aruba, Bonaire and Curagao) Chabacano (Philippines)

4 5 7 7 9 11

3 0 The noun phrase in the Spanish-lexified creóles 3 1. Noun and adjectives 3.1.1. Palenquero 3.1.2. Papiamentu 3.1.3. Chabacano 3.1.4. Comparison, nouns and adjectives 3.2. Pronouns 3.2.1. Palenquero 3.2.2. Papiamentu 3.2.3. Chabacano 3.2.4. Comparison: pronouns 33. Determiners 3.3.1. Articles 3.3.1.1. Palenquero 3.3.1.2. Papiamentu 3.3.1.3. Chabacano 3.3.2. Possessives 3.3.2.1. Palenquero 3.3.2.2. Papiamentu 3.3.2.3. Chabacano 3.3.4. Comparison: determiners

13 13 13 15 18 18 22 22 25 26 28 29 29 29 26 27 32 32 35 36 37

4.0 The verb phrase in the Spanish-lexified creóles

38

2 4.1. Tense, aspect and modality 4.1.1. Palenquero 4.1.2. Papiamentu 4.1.3. Chabacano 4.1.4. Comparison: tense, aspect and modality 4.2. The copula 4.2.1. Palenquero 4.2.2. Papiamentu 4.2.3. Chabacano 4.2.4. Comparison: the copula 5.0 The sentence structure in the Spanish-lexified creóles 5.1. Palenquero 5.2. Papiamentu 5.3. Chabacano 5.4. Comparison: sentence structure 6.0 Conclusion Bibliography

3 List of abrreviations AN = Angolar Creole Portuguese ANT = anterior CAU = causative COP = copula CT = Cotabato Chabacano CV =Caviteño f-;R = Ermitaño Chabacano EX I = existential I O C = focus KUT = future HAB = habitual MIL = highlighter IMP= imperfectivo INT = intensifier IRR = irrealis I K = linker NEG = negation PCS = Philippine Creole Spanish PFC = perfective PL = Palenquero PLU = plural PP = Papiamentu PRG = progresive PT = Portuguese REP = reportative SP = Spanish ST = Santomense TG = Tagalog TOP = topic TR = Ternateño Chabacano UNM = unmarked ZM = Zamboangueño Chabacano

4

List of tables

Table 1: Pluralizaron scheme in Spanish-lexified creóles.

19

Table 2: Pronouns of Palenquero

20

Table 3: Pronouns of Papiamentu

22

Table 4: Pronominal System of Chabacano varieties

23

Table 5: Definite and indefinite articles of Palenquero.

25

Table 6: Definite and indefinite articles of Papiamentu.

27

Table 7: Possessive adjectives and pronouns of Palenquero

28

Table 8: Possessive adjectives and pronouns of Papiamentu

30

Table 9: TMA system of Palenquero

33

Table 10: TMA system of Papiamentu

39

Table 11: Temporal concordance in Papiamentu subordination

43

Table 12: TMA system of Chabacano

44

Table 13: Aspect system of Chabacano and Tagalog

48

Table 14: TMA system of Spanish-lexified creóles

49

List of figures

Figure 1: Chronology of Chabacano dialects

10

5 I 0

Introduction This monograph presents a morphosyntactic comparison of the three Spanish-

loxlfled creóles, namely, Palenquero (Colombia), Papiamentu (Netherlands Antilles) and chabacano (Philippines).

Earlier studies have compared the verb phrase (Maurer

1W87) and the noun phrase (Lorenzino 1992) of Papiamentu (PP) and Palenquero (PL), i a&ulting in a better understanding of the linguistic structure and features of these (taribbean creóles. One outcome of the assessment of their structural similarities and differences is its impact on the question of the types of processes which led to the formation and development of the Spanish-lexified creóles.

For example, substrate

influence has been posited in general creóle studies since certain features are difficult lo explain without referring to their African (Palenquero, Papiamentu) and Austronesian (Chabacano) component. It is even more difficult to account for their diverging in their non-European linguistic features, e.g. pluralizaron. The question which then arises is which African or Austronesian languages (or language families) are responsible for particular creóle features. Thus distinct morphosyntactic features in the noun and verb phrse of Palenquero and Papiamentu indicate that the differing influence of Bantu and Kwa languages upon the Caribbean creóles has not been uniform.

For example,

pluralizaron in Palenquero suggests a strong Bantu component in its early stages of development, while Papiamentu, on the other hand, has a plural marker more like that of Kwa languages. Further evidence for differing substrate influences may be found in PP a and PL á, both tense and aspect markers, whose morphosyntactic and semantic properties indicate a stronger Bantu influence upon Palenquero (Maurer 1987:66). As for Chabacano (Philippine Creole Spanish or PCS), aside from the shared features from Spanish, Chabacano can be expected to have distinct features due to its distinct Austronesian substrate, e.g. the Tagalog and Visayan languages as well as

6 Indonesian influence upon Temateño.

If we can assume that Chabacano underwent

creolization in a way parallel to Palenquero and Papiamentu, certain features in the Philippine creóle must be seen in the light of Austronesian linguistics. However, this interpretation does not rule out other influences in the Creole's genesis and development, e.g. that of the superstate, adstrate, language learning and universal tendencies. Chabacano has features that make it, in certain respects, more like other creóles with Austronesian substrates, e.g. the Malayo Portuguese creóle of Malacca and Indonesta and Tok Pisin, an English-based pidgin of Papua New Guinea. Their linguistic resemblance to Chabacano may be explained at least partly by the fact that they all have an Austronesian substrate. The three main chapters (3-5) examine the most salient morphosyntactic features in the noun phrase, verb phrase and sentence structure of all three Spanishlexified creóles.

Each creóle feature will be presented in consecutive order, i.e. first

Palenquero, then Papiamentu and finally Chabacano, so that the reader can follow more easily the similarities and differences among the three creóles.

There will be

ocassionally references to other Iberian-lexified creóles such as the Gulf of Guinea creóles - especially Santomense - because of their possible historical link with Palenquero (see below). In Chapter 2 a sociohistorical introduction sketches the major events surrounding each creóle society. For sources of data I have relied mainly on four substantial creóle corpora: Friedemann and Patino Rosselli (1983) for Palenquero, Whinnom (1956) and Forman (1972) for Chabacano, and Maurer

(1988) for

Papiamentu. I would like to thank Armin Schwegler for allowing me to quote from his forthcoming article on Palenquero together with Kate Green (see Schwegler and Green fc.) and John Holm for sending me his paper on a comparison of Palenquero,

7 l'nplamentu and Chabacano (see Holm 2000). To my knowledge the following analysis of the Spanish-lexified Creoles' morphosyntax and Holm's manuscript are the first comparative overviews of Palenquero, Papiamentu and Chabacano.

V 0. Sociohistorical Background ;' 1 Palenquero (Colombia) Palenque de San Basilio is a community of descendants of runaway slaves, located in the Department of Bolivar in northern Colombia, 40 miles south of Cartagena 2. Papiamentu (Aruba, Bonaire and Curagao) Papiamentu is an Iberian (Spanish and Portuguese) lexified creóle spoken by approximately 250,000 people in the Netherlands Antilles' leeward islands of Aruba, Donaire and Curagao not far from the Venezuelan coast, which together with the Dutch windward islands of St. Maarten (St. Martin), St. Eustatius and Saba form a selfgoverning territory, including some 30000 Papiamentu speakers in the Netherlands (Kouwenberg and Murray 1994:4). Aruba, Bonaire and Curagao were shaped by distinct sociobistorical forces loading to the development of a society quite unlike that of the Palenque de San Basilio. While the latter community evolved in relative isolation from the Spanish speaking coastal region of Colombia, Bonaire and Curagao came under Dutch rule in 1634, when the small contingent of occupying Spaniards and their Arawakan Indian slaves were forced to leave the islands; Aruba was seized later, in 1688. However, the white Dutch Hociety did not remain homogeneous long. Sephardic Jews, who had fled Portugal and

10 Spain because of the Inquisition, arrived in Curagao with their slaves in 1659 via the northeastern part of Brazil, a Dutch enclave regained by the Portuguese in 1654. Thus, the coexistence of the Dutch with the Brazilian Jews, together with the ever increasing role of Curasao as an entrepot in the Atlantic slave trade led to the development of a contact language for communication between the following groups: (1) the Dutch and the Brazilian Jews, (2) the white slave owners and their African slaves and (3) slaves of different language background. Creolists still dispute whether the Sephardic Jews who settled in Curagao spoke Portuguese, Castillian and Judeo-Spanish or -Portuguese, also called Ladino. Nonetheless, the proximity of these islands to the Spanish mainland was certainly conducive to a flourishing trade. The illicit trade in slaves began in the 1640s with Spanish ships stopping in Curagao to pick up the human cargoes.

The

recognition of Dutch independence from Spain in 1648 provided new impetus to the transshipment of African labor to Spanish America (Rawley 1981:85). Thus, historical evidence suggests an early Spanish influence on a pidginized form of Portuguese spoken on the islands between the white Dutch and Portuguese population and their slaves. Papiamentu is spoken by almost the entire population of the Dutch Leeward islands, regardless of class or ethnic group. It is widely employed in the media (radio, television and newspapers); in addition, it has been proposed as the medium of instruction during the early years of education (Maurer 1988:4). Thus, Papiamentu is most unusual among the Caribbean creóles in that it has a high degree of acceptance. This sociolinguistic situation seems to stem in part from the fact that Papiamentu co-exists with Dutch, which is not its lexical source language; therefore, the people of the Aruba, Bonaire and Curasao do not view Papiamentu as a lower variety of the

11 official language, an attitude which is lacking among speakers of Palenquero and Chabacano. Besides the two somewhat different spelling conventions for Papiamentu, with Arubans adopting one form, and Curagoans and Bonaire another, there are some dialect differences which extend to all language components, including a more hispanized formal register which contrasts with less hispanized ones spoken informally. Nonetheless, all three Papiamentu dialects remain mutually intelligible (Andersen 1974, Wood 1972, quoted in Kouwenberg and Murray 1994:5).

v 3 Chabacano (Philippines) Philippine Creole Spanish is known in the Philippines as Chabacano (<Spanish chabacano 'cheap') (Corominas 1987:188). It was once spoken in several regions of the Philippines, including Cavite (Caviteño CV) and Témate (Temateño TR) on Manila llay, Davao (Davaueño DV) and Cotabato (Cotabato Chabacano CT) (Lipski 1987:91). Chabacano has over two hundred thousand speakers in Zamboanga del Sur (Zamboangueno ZM) living in Zamboanga City and Basilan Island in the southern Philippines (McFarland 1983:109). The discrepancy between the 1975 census data and later reports (Lipski 1987:91) points to a rapid reduction in the number of Chabacano speakers, to the extent that all Chabacano varieties are considered nearly extinct, with the exception of Zamboangueno.

Zamboangueno is Zamboanga's language of

commerce, culture and politics, and is used in radio and TV broadcasts alternating with I nglish and Tagalog. Zamboangueno enjoys a sociolinguistic status which favors its nurvival in the region, despite being surrounded by so many languages.

12 The origin of Chabacano remains uncertain. The earliest Chabacano variant to arise might have been Ternateño when Spanish settlers from the island of Témate in the Moluccas Islands moved to the Manila area in 1660 (Whinnom 1956:7). There they established a military garrison to prevent the attacks of the Chinese pirate, Koxinga (ibid.). Ternateño presumably produced two offshoots, Caviteño and Ermitaño, after families from Témate resettled in Cavite and Ermita (ibid. :11-12). Finally, Zamboanga was populated in 1719 by Spanish and Tagalog speakers who moved there from other regions in the Philippines.

It is likely that the Tagalog-speaking troops also spoke

Caviteño or Ermitaño (ibid.:14). Zamboangueño then spread to Davao, Basilan, Jolo and Cotabato during this century (Lipski 1988:25).

Thus a possible chronology and

genetic relationship of all Chabacano variants is shown in Fig. 1.

Caviteño (1660) Zamboangueño

Davaueño

Cotabato Chabaci

(late A

(1900)

Figure 1: chronology of Chabacano dialects; years represent only approximate settlement dates (adapted from Whinnom (1956:17)

13

:\ 0. The noun phrase in Spanish-lexified creóles Although no attempt will be made here to describe all details of the noun phrases in Palenquero, Papiamentu and Chabacano, the following discussion will focus on the major NP elements (nouns, adjectives, pronouns and determiners) as well as other mlovant notions such as gender, number and word order.

\ 1 Nouns and Adjectives ; H 1. Palenquero Gender agreement is not overtly marked for nouns and adjectives and need not be marked for number. Adjectives are derived from the Spanish form for the masculine mngular. As in Spanish, adjectives generally follow nouns when attributive, except for those derived from Spanish adjectives which precede the noun, e.g. buen: (l) akí sé

jablá

nu

un palabra africanomá

here HAB speak NEG a word

nu. (F&P 1983:279)

African more NEG

'Here not an African word is spoken.'

(?) /

un guen piaso koriyo. (F&P1983:274)

anda good piece meat 'and a good piece of meat.'

Predicative adjectives, likewise, show no inflectional morphology: (3) /

la

señora taba preso. (F&P 1983:202)

and the woman COP imprisoned 'And the woman was imprisoned.'

I he proclitic plural marker ma when preceding count nouns indicates plurality; before mass nouns it is employed to convey a collective idea:

14 (4)/

á

tenéunma

ndo baka. (F&P 1983:233)

1s CPL have a PLU two cow 'I have (approximately) two cows.'

(5) /

ma bakita

tambié, ma

and PLU little cow also

ngombesito. (F&P 1983:235)

PLU little cattle

'And the little cows also, the little cattle.'

Word derivation in Palenquero is seen in (5) where the Spanish diminutive suffixes -italito attach to both Spanish (vaca) and African-derived (ngombe) lexicon. larger than two make ma redundant, though there are exceptions, e.g.

Numerals PL ma ndo

mano, SP las dos manos 'the two hands'. (6)/'

sutoá

ten tre

mona, tre

mona: uno ku

tresi

año. (F&P 1983:205)

and 1p CPL have three child three child one with thirteen year 'And we have three children, three children: one is thirteen years old.'

However, it is not always the case that all nouns are invariable for number. Schwegler and Green (fc.) point out that in Palenquero ma anima ri aki and ma animale ri aki both mean 'the animals from here1; however, one should not assume that animale (<Spanish animales) represents the more modern Spanish borrowing. Furthermore, the contrast between overt vs. non-overt ma is conditioned more by pragmatic factors than just morphology alone, as shown in the overt use of ma cuadros in (7a) (cuadros is an organization composed of young Palenqueros of different ages) and the interlocutor's response with non-overt plural cuadros in (7b): (7a) \abla mi kumoera

ma kusa ri MA

KUAGRO akft

Speak me how COP PLU thing of PLU cuadro

here

'tell me how these things were with the cuadro here (in Palenque)!' (Schwegler and Green fc.)

15 (/b)

KUAGRO ri aora, eso ta desoddeanao cuadro of now this COP disorganized The cuadros of nowadays, this is disorganized (= today's cuadros are disorganized) (idem)

:u.2. Papiamentu Papiamentu's noun phrase exhibits some common characteristics with other Atlantic creóle independently of their lexical base.

As early as 1869, Van Name

observed that "the article, adjective and noun in Papiamentu are invariable in respect to both gender and number" (1869-70:153). Likewise, the third person plural pronoun nan IN homphonous with the enclitic plural marker nan, another of many Atlantic creóle foatures. Papiamentu's pronominal system does not have distinct subject and object forms. Nouns and adjectives are not inflected for gender: (8) ChaNansi no por a saca eidea di gana e baca gordo Cha Nancy NEG able ANT get out the idea of obtain the cow big 'Anansi could not get out of his mind the idea of getting the big cow.' (Maurer 1988:360)

! he words muhé 'woman' (SP mujet) and homber 'man' (SP hombre) are sometimes Mdded to nouns to indicate natural gender: (9) Parseku Yvette ta potret disu ruman muhe difuntu seems that Yvette COP portrait of her brother/ sister woman dead 'It seems that Yvette is the portrait of her dead sister.1 (Maurer 1988:368)

Other examples of gender specification by a juxtaposed noun are: ruman homber 'brother', ruman muhé 'sister', yu homber 'son', yu muhé 'daughter', mucha homber

16 'boy', mucha muhé 'girl' (cf. PP mucha 'child' and SP muchacho/a), buriku machu 'male donkey' and buriku muhé 'female donkey' (Munteanu 1996:266). Like Papiamentu, Santomense, a Portuguese-lexified creóle spoken in Sao Tomé and Principe (cf. Sandoval's reference to the "criollos de Sao Tomé"), can indicate natural gender by having ome 'man, male' (PT homem 'man') and mwala 'woman, female' (Kikongo mwalakaji) following the noun, e.g. bwe ome 'male ox1 (PT 60/'ox') and bwe mwala 'female ox' (Ivens Ferraz 1979:60). Papiamentu nouns derived from Spanish words with derivational morphemes indicating a male-female contrast maintain this distinction, e.g. aktor 'actor' (SP actor) vs. aktris ' actress' (SP actriz) (Maurer 1988:36). Adjectives usually are placed after nouns as in baca gordo in (8) above. However, like SP bonita and buena, a small class of adjectives can occur before nouns without any apparent modification of meaning: (10) Pasobrae

ta

un bunita

Because she COP a

mucha. (Maurer 1988:370)

beautiful girl

'Because she is a beautiful girl.' (11) Antonio no tabata presente di a Dios a

parti

e

bon cualidadnan ayi

Antonio NEG COP present day God CPL distribute the good qualitiesPLU there •Antonio was not present the day God distributed good qualities.' (Maurer 1988:380)

Plurality is marked by means of an enclitic homophonous with the third person plural pronoun nan, plural marking is not redundant: (12) elamira she see

Marcel ta

papia ku tres kabajero. (Maurer 1988:392)

Marcel PRG speak with three men

'She saw Marcel speaking with three men.'

The pluralizer -nan is affixed to a noun preceded by a numeral only when an article or po pronoun is preposed to the entire noun phrase:

17 (13) e tres dialektonan di e

luga. (Maurer 1988:388)

the three dialect-PLU of the region The three dialects of the region.'

(14) el a

duna su dos yunan

homber tambe tres nomber kada un.

he CPL give his two child PLU man

also

three name each one

'He gave three names to each of his three sons.' (Maurer 1988:388)

I he pluralizing force of -nan can be extended to more than one noun.

When two

oemantically related nouns are conjoined by the conjunction ku, the plural marker is affixed to the last of the two nouns but both lie within its semantic range: (15) e kuchúku

forkinan. (Dijkhoff 1983:223)

the knive and fork PLU The knives and forks.'

Proper nouns can also have nan attached to them; however, two interpretations of the plural marker are possible in this case: (16) Mañanan, (ibid.) 'all the people called Maria.' (17) Mañanan, (ibid.) 'Maria and her group of friends/relatives, etc.'

The third person plural nan has no Iberian etymology. Indeed, its syntactic distribution as both a pronoun and plural marker suggests that nan has an African origin. Like Papiamentu, many Kwa languages use the third person plural pronoun as a plural niarker (Holm 1988:193), which suggests there is a likely substrate tie between ST ine (third person plural pronoun) (Ivens Ferraz 1979:66) and PP nan.

18 3.1.3. Chabacano Chabacano's noun phrase exhibits some features which are common to Palenquero, Papiamentu and creóles in general. Nouns and adjectives are unmarked for gender, with number indicated either with a free particle (manga) before the nominal head or Spanish plural inflectionals (see below). Pronouns derive mostly from Spanish although Zamboangueño has Visayan forms in the plural (Whinnom 1956:88). Possessive markers precede the noun head and are clearly derived from the lexifier. Chabacano has a system of definite and indefinite articles, as well as deictic forms that correspond in their morphosyntax and semantics to those in Spanish.

One salient

feature of the noun phrase is reduplication. Unlike Atlantic creóles, Chabacano has reduplication of nouns, adjectives and verbs with semantic changes indicative of Austronesian influence. Grammatical gender markings are absent in Chabacano. possess a gender distinction appear mostly in the masculine.

Forms which still Exs. (18) and (20)

indicate biological gender by means of Spanish sufiixes, masculine -o and feminine -a. Other lexical pairs with gender contrast are: bonito/-a, guapol-a, amigof-a, etc. (Lipski 1987:44): (18) CV: Pedro, hijo de Ñora Culasa. (Whinnom 1956:50) Pedro son of Mrs. Culasa 'Pedro (who) is Mrs. Culasa's son'.

(19) ZM: El gente

de ciudad (Whinnom 1956:68)

the people of city The people from the city.' (20) ER: un muchacha nerviosa. (Whinnom 1956:24) a girl

nervous

'a nervous girl.'

19 Although (20) shows noun-adjective agreement for gender, this is not a regular construction: (21) CV: este vieja

dimasiao religioso. (Whinnom 1956:51)

this old woman very

religious

This very old religious woman.1 (22)ER:e/ playa iluminao. (ibid.:27) the beach illuminated 'the illuminated beach.'

Plural markers of nouns and adjectives are the result of Spanish and Tagalog influence. Spanish plural -s is widespread in all Chabacano variants.

However, plurality is not

nlways overtly marked. Thus in (23) SP -s is expected since a numeral precedes the noun. (23) ZM: cada rama tiene siete plores. (Whinnom 1956:70) each branch have seven flower-PLU 'there are seven flowers in each branch.' (24) ER: Pelisa no

ya

podé reprimí el

lágrimas, (ibid. :26)

Felisa NEG CPL able repress the tear-PLU 'Felisa could not repress her tears.'

The irregularity in plural marking is apparent when comparing (25) and (26): (25) ZM: siete palo0 seven tree

tiene el monte. (Whinnom 1956:70) has the mountain

The mountain has seven trees.' (26) ZM: nacieron tres maravillas. (ibid.:71) born

three wonders

'three wonders were born.'

20 The pluralizer maga, manga or mana (TG mga, ibid.) precedes the noun. Possessives, articles and deictics may come before the plural marker.

Chabacano manga can

accompany nouns in both the singular and, redundantly, in the plural. Thus in (27) ojos is likely to be perceived as the basic form due to being used more frequently than the singular ojo; cf. Haitian CF zié 'eye' from the French plural /esyei/x(Holm p.c). (27) ER: el manga ojos de ele. (Whinnom 1956:24) the PLU

eyes of her

'the eyes of her.' (28) CV: bueno pa este manga puelco. (¡bid.:69) better for this PLU

pig

'these pigs are better off.'

Reduplication of adjectives and nouns conveys the idea of plurality and intensification. Adjectival reduplication employs the Tagalog linkers -nglna before the next adjective. Compare the Tagalog sentence in (29) with Chabacano in (30): (29) TG: Sino ang matabang-mataba? (Schachter and Otanes 1972:231) who TOP fat LK

fat

'who's the very fat one?' (30) ER: Pelisaya

reza ele puelteng-puelte con Dios. (Whinnom 1956:25)

Felisa CPL pray him strong-LK-strong to God 'Felisa prayed intensely to God.'

There is some variation in reduplication mechanisms, as exemplified by (31) and (32): (31) CV: y

cucí vos buenol-bueno, ha?(Whinnom 1956:50)

and cook 2s well well

INT

'and you cook very well, don't you?' (32) CV: Pedro buenung-bueno cucí comida. (ibid.:50) Pedro well LK well 'Pedro cooks very well.'

cook food

21 Intensification via TG na is seen in (33).

Here the whole phrase is a Tagaiog

construction: (33) CV: Ram6n, tamadna tamad (ibid.:52) Ramón lazy LK lazy 'Ramón who is very lazy.'

Zamboangueño does not have the linkers -ng/na to mark intensification, using rather the Visayan intensrfier gayot suffixed to an adjective, e.g. grande gayot 'very large' (Lipski 1988:32). Nominal reduplication usually carries an indefinite plural meaning, as in CH cosa-cosa* stuff' (Whinnom 1956:26). The adverb in Chabacano has the same form as the adjective. Thus in (30) puelte is used instead of the adverb. Spanish transfer is apparent in cases like (34) where the adverbial suffix -mente appears: (34) ER: el playa, iluminao, ta

espera con ele, humildemente (Whinnom 1956:27)

the beach illuminated PRG wait to her humbly The illuminated beach was waiting for her.'

3 1 4. Comparison: Nouns and adjectives Pluralizaron offers an interesting contrast of the three creóles: PL ma

PP -nan

CH manga

free morpheme

bound morpheme

free morpheme

pronominal

postnominal

prenominal

not a pronoun

same form as 3p

not a pronoun

Table 1: Pluralizaron scheme in Spanish-lexified creóles

22 Palenquero ma is of Bantu origin (Granda 1978:465) and PP -nan of Kwa origin syntactically

(Maurer 1987:62);

however, CH manga is clearly an Austronesian

loanword, from TG mga (Whinnom 1956:81).

Different substrates led to differing

African and Austronesian pluralizaron strategies.

Note, however, that similar

typological conditionings might have also been at work in producing the pluralizaron processes in Palenquero and Chabacano. Different types of reduplicative processes in nouns and adjectives, which convey a variety of notions such as continuity, habituality, randomness, etc., are found in many creóles, both Iberian (Afro- and Indo-) Portuguese Creoles and non-Iberian, e.g. Sranan (Adamson and Smith 1995); reduplication is not, though, a universal creóle feature. Reduplication in Chabacano, unlike that in Palenquero and Papiamentu, is very pervasive and it is used to express plurality, e.g. ZM kyen-kyen 'who all' and cosa cosa 'what all' (Forman 1972:109); cf. AN foga-foga and fo-foga, both 'asthma' (AN fógó 'respiration' lo ke, e.g. SP el poquito de maíz, el (lo) que yo tenía 'the little corn I had.' (139) chito maí lo k' í

teneba. (F&P 1983:233)

little corn that 1s have ANT 'the little corn I had'

The greater markedness of PL lo ke is more apparent when it combines with deictics: (140) ese lo ke t'

ai

ta

mini lo memo. (F&P 1983:224)

that who COP there ANT come the same That one who is there came anyway.'

The particle / is also used to introduce relative clauses. It is not certain how this feature of Palenquero evolved. Friedemann and Patino Rosselli (1983:177) note its phonetic similarity to the reduced preposition / < SP de 'of (see 141); however, they discount any grammatical connection between / and de.

Alternatively, PL / could be an African

caique, reanalyzing the particle /as derived from SP conjunction y'and' (ibid.). (141) aqua í

sutosé

water that 1 p

bebéé

aqua I loyo. (F&P 1983:214)

HAB drink COP water of stream

The water we drink is from the stream.1

68 5.2. Papiamentu Sentential negation in Papiamentu has only forward scope, i.e. the negation particle no is positioned between subject ard predicate: (142) pasó

mi

ke

ke

polis yu'i Korsou

because 1s believe that police

no

ta

kumini Korsou.

Curagao NEG HAB suit

Curasao

'Because I believe Curasao's police does not suit Curasao.' (Michel p.c.)

Only lo precedes the negative particle (cf. 107).

Word order in Papiamentu is

predominantly SVO, except with verbs like bini and yega 'arrive' (Maurer 1988:43): V (143) A

S

yega Korsou

unbarkuyen

di turista merikanu. (Maurer 1988:44)

CPL arrive Curagao a ship filled of tourist American 'A ship filled with American tourists arrived in Curagao.'

Likewise, interrogative sentences have SVO word order, as in Palenquero: S (144) M ata unda mi casa

V pora

hañae

placa

aki? (Maurer 1988:356)

but FOC where my hustand can ANT find the money here 'But, where could my husband find money?'

The subordinating conjunction ku is introduced to form complex sentences, e.g. nominal and adjectival clauses (ibid. :158ff). (145) min'

ke

bisaku

ta

yuda kriminalidat. (Michel p.c.)

1s-NEG want say that HAB help crime 'I don't want to say that (police) help crime.'

As a nominalizer, ku can introduce object clauses:

69 (146) M' a

tendeku

kasi

sigure

ta

barka otro manjan. (Maurer 1988:366)

1s CPL hear that almost sure he PRG embark after tomorrow 'I heard that it was almost certain he was embarking the day after tomorrow.1 There are cases when ku may be deleted as when it is followed by an object clause (¡bid.:161ff.): (147) M'a

bisabo 0 mi so'n

1s CPL tell-you

ta

keda kas

awe. (Maurer 1988:161)

1s alone-NEG ANT stay home today

'I told you that I didn't stay home alone today.'

The subordinating conjunction pa may be deleted with certain verbs, e.g. ke, and it is generally controlled by volitional verbs, e.g. desea 'wish'. On the contrary, ku follows perceptional verbs, e.g. fencfe(cf.146): (148) Pero pronto but

el a

disidí riba su meskuenta pa no

baiskol.

right away he CPL decide of his own account for NEG go school

'So he decided right away on his own account not to go to school.' (Maurer 503:179)

5.3. Chabacano The SVO pattern characteristic of many Atlantic creóles is not so strict in Chabacano.

Some subject-verb inversion is possible, in particular with pronominal

subjects (Green 1988:456). This word-order inversion extends to most subjects, except proper nouns. In sentence (149) below the subject NP el cura is placed after the prepositional phrase, resulting in a non-Spanish VOS order. Tagalog has a tendency to have predicates in initial position.

Phrases or words precede arquments, e.g. TG

naglato ng pagkain ang ¡ola 'cooked some food grandmother', i.e. 'grandmother cooked some food' (Schachter and Otanes 1972:61).

70 V (149) ER: Ya

O

S

consola con ele el cura. (Whinnom 1956:26)

CPL comfort to her the priest The priest comforted her.'

The proper noun phrase in (150) blocks any word order change. S

V

(150) ER: Pelisa ya

O

contempla con ele. (Whinnom 1956:27)

Felisa CPL gaze

to

him

'Felisa gazed at him.'

Word

order

in interrogatives

remain

SVO,

as

in donde uste/tu ta queda?

(formal/informal) 'Where do you live? (Camins 1999:19). Sentential negation in Chabacano is achieved by means of the particle no. Declarative sentences have no before the verb phrase.

Zamboangueño has, in

addition, the Tagalog and Hiligaynan (another Austronesian substrate) negator hendeq (Lipski 1988:31) and nuay (<SP no hay 'there is/are not1), the latter used to negate locational, existential and past verbal predicates (Holm 2000:11). In Tagalog hende can operate in either the predicate or the topic (Schachter and Otanes 1972:517).

The

distribution of the negator in Zamboangueño is more restricted, usually to clause-initial position.

Moreover, it negates verb stems less frequently than CH no.

Favored

environments for hendeq are immediately preceding pronominal subjects, preverbal markers and enclitics (e.g. TG pa 'yet, still'). (151) ZM: si hendeq kita if NEG

puede sake blbo. (Forman 1972:36)

we two (incl.) can

'if we can't get you alive.'

get

alive

71 (152) ZM: el

muher hendeqpa daw ta

the woman NEG

pensá kasá. (idem.)

yet REP PRG think married

The woman said she was not thinking of getting married yet.' (In 152 dawis a reportative particle.)

Contrast (151) and (152) with the Tagalog negative sentence given below: (153) TG:.Hindi pa dumarating ang bus. (Schachter and Otanes 1972:518) NEG yet PFC-come TOP bus The bus hasn't come yet'

Zamboangueño is the only Chabacano variety to have borrowed from Austronesian substrate

languages

the word hindi along with its morphosyntactic features.

Clause-marker deletion is sometimes accompanied by word-order inversion in the main clause: (154) ZM: pensá ba el

muher, 0 man-amigo lang silá. (Forman 1972:35)

think ANT the woman

PRF friend just they.

The woman thought that they could just be friendly to each other.'

Clause-marker deletion is found with the verbs kyere desir 'mean', eksklamá 'exclaim', pregunta 'ask', kontestá 'answer' and sintf 'sense' (ibid.:202). Clause markers come from both the superstrate and substrate. Spanish-derived markers are CV qui, ER que, ZM ke, kel, all meaning 'that'.

They all behave like SP que, except that they may

introduce an explicative cause, approximately translated as 'because'.

The proper

interpretation of the clause marker is contextualiy determined. (155)ZM: sigi

ya ¡angle ta

pensá ke pensákon ese muher, kel

keep ANT just he PRG think and think with that woman because byen. bonita gayot very

nice

indeed

72 Papiamentu and Chabacano both exhibit a negation pattern which resembles Spanish more.

Zamboangueño, however, has borrowed from Tagalog and Hiligaynon the

negator hendeq. This negator has a more restricted use than no. Clause and phrase markers in Palenquero and Papiamentu are derived from Spanish. However, they do not always follow the syntax of the lexifier. Likewise, most Chabacano complementizers are Spanish, while the remaining are Austronesian. Sometimes a marker takes a new function, e.g. CH kel 'because', PL lo ke 'that ' and PP ku, object marker. Clause-marker deletion is permitted with certain verbs, e.g. verbs of volition and perception. In some instances, the creóles have adopted a relative construction that diverges from that of Spanish and/or their substrates. This is the case with TG kaya, a subordinating marker that introduces a resultative clause. Chabacano kay functions in exactly the opposite way, by having an explicative clause.

6.0 Conclusion This comparative study of the Spanish-lexified creóles has pointed out a number of structural differences among them and the possible historical constraints upon them, especially from Spanish, Portuguese and substrates. Though it is apparent the active role Spanish (and possibly Portuguese) had during creolization, it is also crucial to understand the role Austronesian languages (Tagalog, Visayan, Cebuano, etc.) on Chabacano and African languages (Bantu, Kwa) on Palenquero and Papiamentu, as sources of some of their morphosyntactic features. This was a secondary goal of this monograph. Further evidence for this differential substrate influence can be seen by comparing

Chabacano

with

other

Austronesian-influenced

creóles

such

as

73 Malayo-Portuguese and Tok Pisin.

Certain features shared by all three point to

Austronesian influence, since the lexifier is different in each case (Spanish, Portuguese, and English), respectively. Sociolinguistic considerations, which fall outside the scope of this study, are of course crucial in the creolization of the three Spanish-lexified creóles.

First, the permanent contact of Chabacano speakers with the aboriginal

languages of the Philippines has been of paramount importance in shaping the language's development.

Secondly, Palanqueros' relative isolation from mainstream

Spanish-speaking society until the twentieth century has helped the creóle community to delay the changes that modernization and closer contact with urban settings are likely to impinge on their way of life. Third, considering the higher status Papiamentu enjoys in the Nethelands Antilles one can safely predict a stable and promising future for the creóle. The conclusions reached in this paper are based on the noun phrase, verb phrase and a token of sentence-level features in the Spanish-lexified creóles. Further comparative research in these and other linguistic areas which were only cursorily dealt with in this study (e.g. complex sentences) will improve the descriptive adequacy and the theoretical formulation of the Spanish creóle data. Lastly, it is hoped that this study will attract more research on the history of the Spanish-lexified creóles.

74

Bibliography Adamson, Lilian and Norval Smith. 1995. Sranan. In Arends, Muysken and Smith (eds.), pp. 219-232. Andersen, Roger. 1974. Nativization and hispanization in the Papiamentu of Curagao, N.A.: A sociolinguistic study of variation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin. . 1983. One norm or several?

Linguistic variation inPapiamentu and its role in

language planning. Papiamentu: problems and possibilities, 61-84. Zutphen: De Walburg Pres. 1990. Papiamentu Tense-Aspect, with special attention to discourse. In Singler (ed.)f pp. 59-96. Arends, Jacques, Pieter Muysken and Norval Smith (eds.) 1995. Pidgins and Creoles: an introduction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Barrena,

Natalio.

1957.

Gramática annobonesa. Madrid: Consejo Superior de

Investigaciones Científicas. Bickerton, Derek. 1975. Dynamics of a creóle system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1981. Roots of Languages. Ann Arbor: Karoma. Bickerton, Derek and Aquiles Escalante 1970. Palenquero: A Spanish-lexified Creole of Northern Colombia. Lingua 24:254-267. Boretzky, Norbert. 1983. Kreolsprachen, Substrate und Sprachwandel. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Camins, Bernardino S. 1999. Chabacano de Zamboanga Handbook and ChabacanoEnglish-Spanish Dictionary. Quezon City: Claretian Publications.

75 Carrington, L.D., D.R. Craig and R. Todd Dandare (eds.). 1983. Studies in Caribbean Languages. St. Augustine: Society for Caribbean Linguistics. Castillo Mathieu, Nicolás del. 1982. Esclavos negros en Cartagena y sus aportes léxicos. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Comrie, Bernard, (ed.) 1987. The World's Major Languages. NY: Oxford University Press. Coraminas, Joan. 1987. Breve diccionario etimológico de la lengua castellana. Madrid: Gredos. Dijkhoff, Martha. 1983. The process of pluralization in Papiamentu. In Carrington et al. (eds.) :217-229. 1987. Complex Nomináis and Composite Nouns in Papiamentu.

In Maurer and

Stolz (eds.), pp. 1-10. Escalante, Aquiles. 1954. Notas sobre el palenque de San Basilio, una comunidad negra de Colombia. Divulgaciones etimológicas III, 5. Forman, Michael L. 1972. Zamboangueño texts with grammatical analysis: a study of Creole Spanish. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University. Ann Arbor: UMI. Friedemann, Nina S. and Carlos Patino Rosselli. 1983. Lengua y Sociedad en el Palenque de San Basilio. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Gilbert, Glen G. (ed.). 1987. Pidgin and creóle languages: essays in memory of John E. Reinecke. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. Goilo, E. R. 1972. Papiamentu textbook. Aruba: de Wit Stores. Goodman, Morris. 1987. The Portuguese element in the American creóles. In Gilbert (ed.), pp. 361-405. Goodman, W. n d. E1 ayuda que ta sale na cielo. New Paris, Indiana: World Missionary Press.

76 Granda, Germán de. 1968. La tipología criolla de dos hablas del área lingüística hispánica. Thesaurus 23:193-205. 1974. El repertorio lingüístico de los sefarditas de Curagao durante los siglos XVII y XVIII y el problema del origen del papiamento. Romance Philology 28:1 -16. 1978. Estudios lingüísticos hispánicos, afrohispánicos y criollos. Madrid: Gredos. Green, John. N 1988. Romance Creoles. In Harris and Vincent (eds.), pp. 420-473. Hancock, lan. 1986. The Domestic Hypothesis, Diffusion and Componentiality. An Account of Atlantic Anglophone Creole Origins. In Muysken and Smith (eds.), pp. 71-102. Harris, Martin and Nigel Vincent (eds.) 1988. The Romance Languages. NY: Oxford University Press. Holm, John A. 1988-9. Pidgin and Creoles, 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. Chabacano versus related creóles: (socio)linguistic affinities and differences. Paper presented at the conference, "Shedding Light on the Chabacano Language: Learning from General Linguistics and Similar Cases"; Manila, October 19-21, 2000 Holm, John A. and Peter Patrick (eds.) and. Forthcoming. Comparative Creole Syntax. London: Battlebridge Press. Ivens Ferraz, Luiz 1974. A linguistic appraisal of Angolar. In Memoriam Antonio Jorge Dias. Lisbon: Instituto de Alta Cultura. 1979. The Creole of Sao Tomé. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. 1987. Portuguese creóles of West Africa and Asia. In Gilbert (ed.), pp. 337-360. Kent, R. K. 1979. Palmares: An African state in Brazil. In Price (ed.), pp. 170-190. Kouwenberg, Silvia and Eric Murray. 1994. Papiamentu. München/Newcastle: Lincom Europa.

77 Lenz, Rodolfo. 1928. El Papiamento: la lengua criolla de Curazao (la gramática más sencilla). Santiago, Chile: Balcells. Lewis, Anthony R. 1970. A Descriptive Analysis of the Palenquero Dialect (a Spanish-based creóle of northern Colombia, South America). Master thesis, University of the West Indies at Mona, Jamaica. Lipski, John. 1987. Descriollizaci6n del criolla hispanofilipino: el caso de Zamboanga. Revista española de lingüística 17:3756. 1988. Philippine Creole Spanish: assessing the Portuguese element. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 104:25-45. Lorenzino, Gerardo A. 1992. Un estudio comparativo de la frase nominal en palenquero y papiamento. Papia (Revista de crioulos de base Ibérica): 50-70. 1998. The Angolar Creole Portuguese of Sao Tomé (West Africa): its grammar and sociolinguistic history. München: Lincom Europa. Maurer, Philippe. 1987. La comparison des morphemes temporels du papiamento et du palenquero: arguments contre la theórie monogénétique de la genese des langues creóles. In Maurer and Stolz (eds.), pp. 27-70. 1988. Les modifications temporelles et modales du verbe dans le papiamento de Curagao (Antilles Neerlandeses). Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag. 1995. L'angolar: Un creóle afro-portugais parlé á Sao Tomé. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag. Maurer, Philippe and Thomas Stolz (eds.). 1987. Varia Creolica. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Megenney, William W. 1986. El Palenquero: un lenguaje post-criollo de Colombia. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Montes, José J. 1962. Sobre el habla de San Basilio de Palenque. Thesaurus 17: 446-450.

78 Mühlhausler, Peter. 1986. Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. NY: Basil Blackwell Munteanu, Dan. 1996. El papiamento, lengua criolla hispánica. Madrid: Gredos. Muysken, Pieter. and Norval Smith (eds.). 1986. Substrate versus Universals in Creole Genesis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Mc Farland, Curtis D. 1983. A linguistic atlas of the Philippines. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Culture of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. Ortiz, Luis (ed.). 1999 El Caribe hispánico: perspectivas lingüísticas actuales (Homenaje a Manuel Alvarez Nazario). Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Verlag / Madrid: Iberoamericana. Pavy, David. 1967. The Provenance of Colombian Negros. Journal of Negro History 52:36-58. Price, Richard (ed.). 1979. Maroon societies: Rebel slave communities in the Americas. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Rawley, James A. 1981. The Transatlantic Slave Trade: A History. New York: W.W. Norton. Riego de Dios, Maria I. 1979. The Cotabato Chabacano (CT) verb. Papers in Pidgin and Créale Linguistics, no. 2, A-57. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Australian National University, Research School of Pacific Studies. Sandoval, Alonso de. 1627. De instauranda Aethiopum salute. Seville (Reprinted in 1987. Madrid: Alianza Editorial). Schachter, Paul. 1987. Tagalog. In Comrie (ed.), pp. 936-58. Schachter, Paul and Fe T. Otanes. 1972. Tagalog Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.

79 Schuchardt, Hugo. 1882. Kreolische Studien I. Ueber das Negerportguiesische von S. Thome (Westafrica). Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien 101:889-917. Schwegler, Armin. 1991. Negation in Palenquero. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 6:165-214. 1992. Future and conditional in Palenquero. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 7:223-59. 1996. Chi ma nkongo: lengua y rito ancestrales en El Palenque de San Basilio (Colombia), 2 vols. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Verlag/Madrid: Iberoamericana. 1999. El vocabulario africano de Palenque (Colombia). Segunda Parte: compendio de palabras (con etimologías). In Ortiz (ed.), pp. 171-253. Schwegler, Armin and Kate Green. In Patrick and Holm (eds.) Singler, John (ed.) 1990. Pidgin and creóle tense-mood-aspect systems. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Van Name, A.ddison. 1869-70. Contributions to creóle grammar. Transactions of the American Philological Association 1:123-167. van Wijk, H.L.A. 1958. Orígenes y evolución del Papiamentu. Neophilologus 42:169-182. Whinnom, Keith. 1956. Spanish contact vernaculars in the Philippine Islands. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Wood, Richard E. 1972. The hispanization of a creóle language. Hispania 55:857-864.