Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
re-do: week 6-7 notes (pt. 2) - Coggle Diagram
re-do: week 6-7 notes (pt. 2)
pidgin is not a language
only a "primitive" way of communicating between two cultures
however, it was enough to trigger cognitive development
therefore, it is possible to develop cognitively, without learning a mother language - and you can do with just a primitive system of communication
so it was common for slaves to use "pidgin"; to communicate with one another
review: pidgin = make-shift jargon
S. Pinker
slaves in the same "company" were often not from the same villages and areas
also to communicate because they can fall in love with each other
characteristics of pidgin
word order is not stable
they do not have word endings or "inflections" (changing words to fit the tense, etc.)
so their "word order" is not stable
so, it is difficult to identify the subject, object, verb. etc. of a sentence (parts of a sentence)
does not have words that are only for grammatical purposes
"endings" are removed
tenses are often spelled out (as separate words), instead of being a part of a verb
side note: pidgin has tenses, to an extent (referring to the past, present, etc.)
pronouns have single form
there is one "word" to describe each pronoun
for example, in english, we have I and me to refer to the same person, etc. etc. ....
but in pidgin, it is all the same; always using I, always using him, etc.
compound words are common
repetition of words, or a part of a word, for grammatical purposes
for example: chair chair = plural of chair
has
no relative
or
subordinate clauses
limited vocabulary and syntax
sounds are based on the common sounds of a language
though it cannot be based on a sort of "mother language" idea (because of the slavery situation)
slavery situation: they cannot see their children or families
and the children would learn "pidgin"
as they were "taught" by the slave that were taking care of children
sounds may be from the European language(?)
difficult consonants/sounds (clusters) are simplified, and vowel system is small
conclusion is: pidgin is not a language
the system of communication was only there for practical reasons
the settings in which they can communicate was limited
people came to the racist conclusion that any language that did not have any complex lexical... etc. etc. ; is an underdeveloped language (primitive)
because of slavery
including having tenses (past, present, future...)
but people can communicate with each other just fine without using European languages
the children, or one generation, managed to develop something that is not pidgin
(while being "taught"/exposed to pidgin)
"pidgin turns into creole" when the child of a slave is taught the language of the "owners" (more "popular" languages, like Dutch, English, etc.)
essentially, the mixing of pidgin and another language
creole
shares common features with other creole around the world
creole
begins to have grammatical features; like the other natural languages
two paradoxes to keep in mind of creole
creole (which practically comes from pidgin, a primitive system of communication) has grammatical features
creole shares common features with other creole that are around the world
explanation and interpretation of the similarity of creole languages
all creoles have similar structure (differently from the languages that they are based on)
meaning that if a creole was based on English, then it would not attempt to imitate the grammar in English
the grammar was different from the language they are based on, because the languages that they are based on, is not used among slaves
essentially, for example: since slaves didn't have access to English language, they wouldn't be sure how to use English grammar (therefore, they wouldn't incorporate it into their creole
you'd think that the children could incorporate the structures of their native languages, but they couldn't
because they were separated from their parents; the children didn't have the opportunity to learn their native language
one might think that the similarity in structure (in creoles around the world) comes from the certain structures of
ancestral languages, or perhaps even coming from the plantation owners
nevertheless, there are still differences between the creoles (in terms of stucture)
it is thought that the similarity in creoles comes from the fact that we all have a sort of..
innate genetic blueprint
for language
in other words:
linguistic structures is innate for humans
BICKERTON'S EXPLANATION
Bickerton's explanation (for the similarities of the creole languages)
we all have a genetic blueprint for language structure
children "fill in" the "vocab" part of language with pidgin
as a result, creole is "created"
this process can be called 'natural experiment" in evolving language
1 more item...
important examples to remember for the midterm, to support Bickerton's hypothesis
english children learn about "question
inversion
" quite late
children who speak creole do not use inversions
for example: "where I can put it?"
children would also not be making this mistake if they were imitating parents
so according to Bickerton, if we are to speak English "properly", we would have to suppress our innate, instinctive "comprehension" of inversion
english children use double negatives; even though it is not part of english grammar
while
creoles uses
only
double negatives
2 more items...
this shows that english children are not imitating their parents' language
2 more items...
in short, bickerton says that we have a genetic blueprint in us all that "pre-equips" us with language structure; then they "fill in" the vocab portion of language, with
pidgin
Chomsky's explanation
we have knowledge that could not have otherwise been acquired from just exposure and in such a short amount of time
it's amazing how by around age 4 or 5, children can have a sort of grasp of a super complex grammatical/linguistic system
how did they manage this?
without a teacher; parents are not teachers
1 more item...
many "facts" about the native tongue does not show up in spoken language
because our memory storage cannot manage all the facts and rules
yet, children can separate the grammatical from ungrammatical forms
according to Chomsky, children have a "universal grammar" model/tools already in their mind, and after they "take the exit of the mother tongue" (which is already a language), they try to match the "grammatical models" to the grammar of their native tongue
so in steps, it might look something like this:
child has grammatical models in their mind
1 more item...
so this might be why children are at first, making mistakes in their mother tongue
they are in the "experimental stage"
in short, chomsky believes that there is a grammatical model in all of us (naturally), and that we try to match our innate grammar, with the natural languages
which explains why children make mistakes; they are not imitating - they are
experimenting
BICKERTON AND CHOMSKY'S DEBATES
Bickerton argues that "universal grammar" is more specific than just everyone having the similar sense of grammatical structure
concludes that we are "preprogrammed" also to a "particular set of switch settings that appear consistently in creole grammar"
we have to suppress and go against our natural instinct of what we think grammar is, when we are first born
that's why it takes time to understand and learn the mother tongue
what is natural to us (innate) that we have to "fix"
2 more items...
practically, what he is saying (against what Chomsky says), is that if the grammatical models that we are born with (innate), contradict the natural language, then it will take time to learn that "new concepts"
meaning we will be suppressing what is natural for us
this might also be another reason why chimpanzees (though we share very similar genes) cannot learn natural languages [besides the biological structure of the mouth]
1 more item...
especially in the setting that the slaves do not have much of a way to learn each other's languages - when they speak in creole, they are using their
innate
nature of language
1 more item...
characteristics of creole (compared to pidgin)
larger vocab than pidgin
more complex grammar
practically able to express anything in creole; like in any natural language
consistent word order
has words with solely grammatical function
is straightforward and often isn't ambiguous
how did pidgin, a primitive communication system, turn into a system of communication with grammatical structure, etc. etc. ?
creoles (in comparison to natural languages)
reduced morphology
no conjugation
no declensions of nounds for case and number
no female or male verb conjugation like French
almost no prepositions
uses words to describe what we would usually use one word for
origin of speech
Chomsky's theory of universal grammar is flaws because it ignored the problem of how the "universal grammar" ability arose
how was it developed in the human brain?
according to
Pinker
and
Bloom
, natural selection plays an important part in the evolution of how human language is designed
it is thought that the FOXP2 gene as gone through its final mutation a long time ago
this gene affects our ability to articulate
fully developed language is said to be have been in place when humans were making art and showing
symbolic behaviours
; which clearly relates to acquiring fluent language
PROVE THAT THIS IS TRUE FOR THE MIDTERM 2
essentially, they cannot be making art and symbolic behaviour without cognitive development
and cognitive development means that there is a fluent language in place
this was found to be at least 50 000 years ago
only when they manage to trigger cognitive development, that is when you know that they have acquired a fluent language
many researchers think that hand gestures and facial expressions are very similar to speech; more so than animal vocalizations do
McNeil
says that hands are directly related to articulation
side note: blind people also use hand gestures when trying to articulate something
hand gestures are an un-erasable part of language (almost like a very necessary part of language and communication)
hand gestures and such are said to be not for show (not particulary for an audience); but an expression of articulation from the speaker's point of view
it is also said that gestures are like a pre-language ability
apes are found to be gesturing with limbs and hands too
25-30 years ago, someone said that we should teach sign language to babies (1-2 years ago...) as first language (before natural language)
to help getting messages out to parents
some people think that clicks are the first languages
clicks have deep roots
and then changed to vocal language because vocalization has more variety of combinations available
conclusions
language is a system that evolved through something like natural selection ("neo-Darwinian mechanisms")
Pinker and Bloom
modern language ability is mostly the result of "selection of neural circuitry", which makes us able to communicate efficiently
as well as being able to communicate an unlimited set of messages
S. Pinker