Re: Japanese as a creole language?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:

> At 11:09:13 AM on Friday, March 28, 2003, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > In the books I read, the hallmark of a creole is the loss
> > of grammatical categories. Check up on Afrikaans.
>
> Traditionally a creole arises from a pidgin when it becomes
> a birth tongue. This rules out English, French, and
> Afrikaans.

Because they are not birth tongues? Please don't use such fuzzy
definitions.

>>Some writers have attempted to extend the term
> to cover all languages with features similar to those
> generalized from creoles; this, in my opinion, robs the term
> of its primary and most useful meaning.

Which is?

>(There is also some
> question as to what features should be included.)

In its primary or which meaning?

>Others
> have used the term 'creoloid' in this sense. This is less
> objectionable,

To whom? Those with the fuzzy definitions?

>but it's not clear that any special term is
> needed for this type of contact phenomenon.

Not clear to whom, Emily Post?

>For those of us
> who retain the traditional meaning, 'creole' describes the
> genesis of the language, not its structure.

The genesis of Modern English (sociological circumstances etc) is
similar to that of other creoles. It is a partially Norman French
relexified, Anglo-Saxon and Old Norse based creole, its genesis
probably mediated by Hanse wool traders in the North of England.

Torsten