Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas: Vol I: Maps. Vol II: Texts 9783110819724, 3110134179

Citation preview

Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas

Trends in Linguistics Documentation 13

Editors Werner Winter Richard A. Rhodes

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York

Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas Volume I Maps edited by

Stephen A. Wurm Peter M iihlhausler Darrell T. Tryon

This Atlas was sponsored by The International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies (UNESCO), The Australian Academy of the Humanities, The International Union ofAcademies, The Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, and The Australian National University, with financial assistance from UNESCO,

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York

1996

Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin.

@)Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication-Data

Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas I edited by Stephen A. Wurm, Peter Miihlhausler, Darrell T. Tryon. p. cm. - (Trends in linguistics. Documentation; 13) "This atlas was sponsored by the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies ... let aLl" Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 3-11-013417-9 (cloth: alk paper) I. Languages in contact. 2. Languages, Mixed. 3. Inter1. Wurm, S. A. (Stephen cultural communication. II. Miihlhausler, Peter. III. Tryon, Adolphe), 1922D. T. (Darrell T.) IV. International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies. V. Series. PI30.5.A87 1996 402' .23-dc20 96-35866 CIP

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - Cataloging-in-Publication-Data

Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas I ed. by Stephen A. Wurm ... This atlas was sponsored by the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies (UNESCO)... - Berlin ; New York : Mouton de Gruyter. (Trends in linguistics: Documentation; 13) ISBN 3-11-013417-9 NE: Wurm, Stephen A. [Hrsg.]; Trends in linguistics I Documentation; 13 Vol. I. Maps. - 1996

© Copyright 1996 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Typeset from the author's word files: K. Handwerker, Berlin Printing: Hubert & Co., Gottingen; Gerike GmbH, Berlin Cover design: ramminger Kommunikation . Werbung . Design GmbH, Berlin Binding: Liideritz & Bauer-GmbH, Berlin Printed in Germany

Table of Contents

Australia 1.

Distribution of Languages other than English in Australia 1861-1871 Compiled by Michael Clyne 6 colours. 1 map

2.

Distribution of Languages other than English in Australia - 1891 Compiled by Michael Clyne 6 colours. 1 map

3.

Distribution of Languages other than English in Australia - 1922 Compiled by Michael Clyne 6 colours. 1 map

4.

Languages other than English in urban centres 1976-1986 Compiled by Michael Clyne 6 colours. 1 map

5.

Aboriginal Koines in Australia Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler and Rob Amery Black and white. 1 map

6.

Land exploration of New South Wales 1813-1836 (sketch map) Compiled by Rob Amery (From Troy 1994) 2 colours. 1 map

7.

Language and culture contacts in SE Australia (sketch maps) Compiled by Ian D. Clark, Peter Mtihlhausler and Rob Amery (in part from Troy 1994, in part based on Fesl, Eve, 1993, Conned, Queensland University Press, and on Cole, Keith, 1988 "Anglican missions to Aborigines", in: Swain-Reeds, Aboriginal Australian Christian Missions) 2 colours. 5 maps: Early settlement - Early exploration - Early Missions and Reserves - Overlander's routes

8.

Post-contact languages of Queensland 1800 to present Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler 6 colours. 3 maps: Torres Strait Broken - Aboriginal and Kanaka contact varieties of English - Queensland mission stations, schools and communities

VI

Table of Contents

9.

Pidgin English and the Queensland Labour Trade Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler Black and white. 3 maps: Main labour recruiting areas for Queensland - Origin of Queensland plantation labour - Language evidence from coronial inquests and trials in Queensland

10.

The development of Pidgin English in South Australia Compiled by A. Dineen and Peter Mtihlhausler 6 colours. 4 maps: Settlement and population movements in South Australia in the 19th century - The effect of draught on population movement - Significant contact sites in South Australia 1803-1860 - Origins of Pidgin English documents

11.

Western Australian Lingue Franche Pidgins and Creoles 1800-1900, 1900 to present Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler and William McGregor 6 colours. 2 maps: 1800-1900 - 1900 to present

12.

Aboriginallingue franche and aboriginal varieties of English in the Northern Territory Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler 5 colours. 3 maps: Early British settlements - Stock routes 1830-1900

13 .

Australian Aboriginal English Compiled by Diana Eades and Peter Mtihlhausler 5 colours. 1 map

14.

Language contacts in Western and Northern Australia Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler and William McGregor Black and white. 7 maps: Principal settlements and major stock routes in Western Australia - Camel routes and Ghan settlements in Western Australia Aboriginal groups working on pearling luggers - Missions and schools in Western Australia - Aboriginal reserves in Western Australia (1972) - Malay-based contact languages in Australia - Makassan names on Groote Eylandt

15.

Main Periods of Currency: Pidgin and Creole Englishes of Australia Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler Black and white. 1 map

16.

Spread of selected diagnostic grammatical constructions in Australian Pidgin English Compiled by Rob Amery and Peter Mtihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

17.

Spread of selected lexical items in Australian Pidgin English Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Mtihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

18.

Spread of selected lexical items of aboriginal origin in Australian Pidgin English Compiled by Rob Amery and Peter Mtihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

Table of Contents

19.

Boundaries and States in Australia Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler Black and white. 9 maps: 1788 -1831 -1836 -1851 -1859 - 1863 -1901 1911 - 1992

20.

Land controlled by Aborigines and Whites 1830-1980 Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler Black and white. 6 maps: 1830 - 1850 - 1870 - 1925 - 1938 - 1980

21.

Missions, Schools and Aboriginal Reserves in Australia Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler Black and white. 3 maps: New South Wales - Northern Territory - South Australia

VII

New Zealand 22.

Aotearoa - New Zealand: Population, ethnicity, language Compiled by Chris Come and Hans-Peter Stoffel 6 colours. 1 map

23.

Origins of Chinese and Indian immigrants to Aotearoa - New Zealand Compiled by Mary Roberts, Chris Come and Hans-Peter Stoffel 4 colours. 2 maps: Principal areas of Punjabi and Gujarati migration to New Zealand Places of origin of Chinese settlers from Guangdong Province in New Zealand

24.

Places of origin and settlement areas in Aotearoa - New Zealand of immigrants from Germany, Austria and South Slav lands Compiled by James Northcote-Bade and Hans-Peter Stoffel Black and white. 4 maps: Settlement areas of immigrants from Germany and Austria-Hungary (excluding South Slav lands) prior to World War I - Birthplaces of Dalmatian chain migrants (1880-) - Major areas of present-day settlement of people from Dalmatia and their descendants - Location of farms owned by people from Dalmatia and their descendants in the area of Waiharara in the 1970s

25.

Indigenous and immigrant Polynesian languages in Aotearoa - New Zealand Compiled by Richard A. Benton, Ross Clark, Janet Holmes and Clive Beaumont Black and white. 4 maps: Maori language maintenance by Geographical County, mid-1970s, North Island - Pacific Island languages in Auckland - Pacific Island languages in Wellington - Pacific Island languages in New Zealand

Melanesia (Papua New Guinea) 26.

Trade languages and areas of extensive language contact in Southeast Papua New Guinea Compiled by Thomas E. Dutton 4 colours. 1 map

VIII

Table of Contents

27.

Papua New Guinea Mekeo, Tasmania, Micronesian Pidgin English Compiled by Alan Jones and Theo Baumann Black and white. 3 maps

28.

Hiri (formerly Police) Motu: its history and distribution Compiled by Thomas E. Dutton 2 colours. 4 maps: Percentage of population ten years and over speaking Police Motu in 1971 - The distribution of Police Motu in 1898 - The distribution of Police Motu at the beginning of World War IT - The distribution of Hiri Motu at Independence in 1975

29.

Papuan-based Pidgins of Mainland Papua New Guinea Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm, Jeff Williams and Thomas E. Dutton 2 colours. 3 maps: Villages and Trade Pidgins in the Yimas trade orbit - The Hiri trading area and languages- Main title

Melanesia (Fiji) 30.

Pidgin Languages in Fiji Compiled by Jeff Siegel 5 colours. 5 maps: Areas where Jargon Fijian may have originated - Movement of pidgin languages 1865-1911 - Plantation languages in Fiji 1905 - Areas where current pidgin Fijian and Pidgin Hindustani are most widely spoken - Movement of indentured labour to Fiji

3 1.

Solomon Islander settlements in Fiji Compiled by Jeff Siegel 2 colours. 2 maps: Wai: the language of the Solomon Islanders in Fiji - Main map

Polynesia 32.

Spread of the Polynesian languages Compiled by Darrell T. Tryon 5 colours. 1 map

33.

Prehistorical language contacts in Polynesia Compiled by Darrell T. Tryon 2 colours. 1 map

34.

Post-18th century language contacts in Polynesia Compiled by Darrell T. Tryon 2 colours. 1 map

Table of Contents

Metropolitan Language (English) 35.

The English language in the Asia Pacific region Compiled by Jeff Siegel 6 colours. 1 map

36.

Introduction and spread of English in the 19th century Compiled by Peter Mlihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

Metropolitan Language (French, including Creoles) 37.

The French language in the South Pacific Compiled by Chris Come and Jim RoHyman 6 colours. 1 map

38.

New Caledonia: The building of Tayo Compiled by Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher and Peter Mlihlhausler Black and white. 3 maps: St-Lois village, core area - The La Conception St-Louis region

Metropolitan Language (Spanish, including Creoles) 39.

The Spanish language in the Pacific area Compiled by John M. Lipski, Peter Mlihlhausler and F. Duthin 6 colours. 2 maps

Metropolitan Language (Portuguese, including Creoles) 40.

Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Asia Pacific region Compiled by Alan Baxter 4 colours. 3 maps: Main title - Principal Portuguese trade routes in SE Asia of the 17th and 18th centuries - Documented 17th and 18th century population shifts involving Portuguese, Mestico, slave and native Christian populations

Metropolitan Language (Dutch and German, including Pidgins) 41.

Dutch and German in the Pacific area Compiled by Peter Mlihlhausler 5 colours. 2 maps: + German toponyms in Kaiser Wilhelmsland

IX

X

Table of Contents

Metropolitan Language (Russian) (also applies to Siberia) 42.

Spread of Russian settlement and language into Siberia Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov 5 colours. 1 map

Metropolitan Language (Japanese, including Pidgins) 43.

Japanese empires Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Rachel Trew 2 colours. 2 maps: Japan's first empire - Japan's second empire

44.

Japanese language contacts and contact languages Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Rachel Trew 4 colours. 1 map

Pidgins (General) 45.

Post-contact Pidgins, Creoles and Lingue Franche based on Indigenous languages (excluding Mission languages) Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler 4 colours. 1 map

Pidgins (English) 46.

English-"based" Pidgins and Creoles in the Pacific area Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker Black and white. 2 maps: The status of pidgins and creoles - Contraction and progression of pidgins and creoles in the 20th century

47.

Origins and Diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler Black and white. 1 map

48.

Developments in English-derived contact languages Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher Black and white. 3 maps: Military pidgins in the 20th century - Creolization of Tok Pisin in the 20th century - Palmerston Island English and Pitcaimesel Norfolkese

49.

Formation and spread of Tok Pisin 1880-1920 Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

Table of Contents

50.

Development and spread ofTok Pisin 1920 to present Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler 6 colours. 3 maps: + Main labour movements - Percentages of Tok Pisin users

51.

Language Contacts in the History of Tok Pisin Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler Black and white. 4 maps: Northeastern Gazelle Peninsula, New Britain 1887 Northeastern Gazelle Peninsula, New Britain 1907 - Japanese schools in Papua New Guinea 1942-1945 - Creolization of Tok Pisin

52.

Chinese Pidgin English in the 19th century Compiled by Philip Baker Black and white. 2 maps: Documented use of Chinese Pidgin English - Foreign influences in 19th century China

53.

Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler 4 colours. 4 maps

54.

Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler 6 colours. 1 map

55.

The spread of 'fellow' as a grammatical affix Compiled by Philip Baker 4 colours. 4 maps

56.

Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler 4 colours. 3 maps

57.

Development and diffusion of selected Pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler 5 colours. 1 map

58.

Grammatical and Lexical Innovations in Pidgin English Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler 4 colours. 1 map

59.

Resettlement and migration in the colonial and post-colonial period Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler 2 colours. 1 map

XI

XII

Table of Contents

Languages used in the Domain of Religion in Insular Southeast Asia and Oceania 60.

Mission and Church languages in Papua New Guinea Compiled by Malcolm Ross 5 colours. 1 map

61.

Mission and Church languages of the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu Compiled by Darrell T. Tryon 2 colours. 1 map

62.

Philippines: Mission and Religious languages Compiled by Andrew Gonzalez 6 colours. 3 maps: Languages used by Christian mission - Major languages used as mission lingue franche - Languages used in Islamic religious teaching

63.

Some Languages of Religious Instruction: Indonesian Archipelago Compiled by Charles E. Grimes 4 colours. 3 maps: Varieties of Tetun in Timor - Hinduism and Christianity: Western Indonesia - Languages of Missionisation: Eastern Indonesia

Arabic-based and other Contact Languages on Maritime Trade Routes to China 64.

Principal maritime trade routes in the early part of the Christian Era: Arabia to the Far East Compiled by Philip Baker 2 colours. 1 map

65.

Centres of trade and language contacts: Arabia to the Far East Compiled by Philip Baker 2 colours. 3 maps: Arabia - South East Asia - India

South-East Asia (Insular, including Irian Jaya) 66.

Pidgin Malay-derived dialects Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 6 colours. 1 map

67.

The Malay language (Historical) Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Malay as a contact language (7th-14th century AD) - Malay as a vehicular language for the spread of Islam (14th-17th century AD)

68.

Malay in Sumatra and Borneo Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 6 colours. 3 maps: Sumatra: the spread of literary Malay - Sumatra: the spread of Minangkabau Malay and Palembang Malay - Borneo: Malay varieties

Table of Contents

69.

Malay in German New Guinea Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar Black and white. 1 map

70.

Malay: Past literary, loan words, and movements Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps

71.

Javanese as a prestige language Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 4 colours. 1 map

72.

Southeast Asia: Indian, Tamil and Thai language influence Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 2 colours. 1 map

73.

Chinese: First and Contact languages (Indonesia, Malaysia) Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 6 colours. 1 map

74.

Sulawesi: Lingue franche Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 6 colours. 1 map

75.

Borneo: some languages and Contact languages Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar 6 colours. 1 map

76.

Eastern Indonesia: Contact languages Compiled by C. L. Voorhoeve and K. Alexander Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Contact languages - Creoles on Java

77.

Tukang Besi as lingua franca Compiled by Mark Donohue 2 colours. 2 maps: Geser as trade language - Main map

78.

Pre-colonial contact languages of Irian Jaya Compiled by Mark Donohue 5 colours. 1 map

79.

Further Contact languages ofIrian Jaya Compiled by Mark Donohue Black and white. 1 map

XIII

XIV

Table of Contents

Philippines 80.

Major languages of wider communication and trade languages of the Philippines Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 6 colours. 1 map

81.

Bilingualism and lingue franche (Northern Philippines) Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 5 colours. 1 map

82.

Bilingualism and lingue franche (Central Philippines) Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 5 colours. 1 map

83.

Bilingualism and lingue franche (Southern Philippines) Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 5 colours. 1 map

Taiwan 84.

Formosan languages in Taiwan Compiled by Paul len-kuei Li 4 colours. 3 maps: Languages of the Plains tribes in Southern Taiwan 17th century Northern Taiwan: main Aboriginal groups - Formosan languages in Taiwan

South-East Asia (Continental) 85.

Ancient kingdoms of South-East Asia Compiled by David Bradley 6 colours. 2 maps: Mon, Khmer - Champa

86.

Southwestern Dai languages Compiled by David Bradley 6 colours. 2 maps

87.

Burmese and Yunnanese Chinese Compiled by David Bradley 6 colours. 2 maps

88.

The Yi and Viet languages Compiled by David Bradley 6 colours. 2 maps

Table of Contents

89.

Nepali and Nagamese Compiled by David Bradley 5 colours. 3 maps

90.

Kachin and Lahu Compiled by David Bradley 5 colours. 2 maps

Indian Subcontinent 91.

Languages of interethnic communication: Indian subcontinent (excluding Nepal) Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen 6 colours. 1 map

92.

Languages of interethnic communication: Assam and Bangladesh Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen 6 colours. 1 map

93.

Languages of interethnic communication: Kashmir and East India Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen 6 colours. 2 maps

China 94.

Chinese overseas language contacts and Contact languages Compiled by Peter Mtihlhausler and Philip Baker Black and white. 3 maps: Chinese languages in Java - Baba Malay - Chinese maritime expansion

95.

North China, Intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 6 colours. 4 maps: The Bortala area - The Xinjiang area - The Manchuria areaThe Gansu-Qinghai area

96.

Northern Manchuria area: Partial language picture, Contact languages Compiled by Juha Janhunen 5 colours. 1 map

97.

Tibetan Compiled by David Bradley 6 colours. 2 maps: Bhutan language

XV

XVI

Table of Contents

98.

Hybrid languages and Contact languages: Northwest China Compiled by Mei W. Lee-Smith 6 colours. 3 maps: Languages in Bortala and surrounding areas - Hybrid languages in NW-China: Hezhou, Wutun, Tangwang - Hybrid languages in NW-China: Ejnu

99.

Languages in the Pamir and in Yunnan Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm and Mei W. Lee-Smith 2 colours. 2 maps: Shugni as lingua franca - The Mongolians in Yunnan

Mongolia 100. Contact languages and language influences in Mongolia Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm 6 colours. 1 map

Central Asia 101. Language situation in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan Compiled by Aleksandr Nikolayevich Baskakov with Aziz Boltayevich Dzhurayev and Khosrov Dzhamshedovich Shombezoda 6 colours. 1 map 102. Language situation in Western Central Asia Compiled by Aleksandr Nikolayevich Baskakov with Ol'ga Doszhanova Nasyrova and Bakhytzhan Khasanovich Khasanov 6 colours. 1 map 103. The silk route until the 17th century Compiled by Janos Harmatta Black and white. 1 map

Caucasus Area 104. The Avar and Lezgin languages in the Caucasus mountains Compiled by Mikhail Yegorovich Alekseyev 6 colours. 1 map 105. Language situation and language contacts, Caucasus area Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm (Based on the map in People of the Caucasus [, Moscow, 1960) 6 colours. 1 map

Table of Contents

XVII

Siberia 106. Distribution of ethnic groups and languages in Siberia in the 17th Century Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov (Based on the map in History of Siberia, Leningrad, 1968-69) 6 colours. 1 map 107. Distribution of ethnic groups and languages in Siberia at the beginning of the 20th Century Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm (Based on the Historical Ethnographic Atlas of Siberia, Moscow-Leningrad, 1961) 6 colours. 1 map 108. Distribution of ethnic groups and languages in Siberia at the beginning of the 20th Century; indigenous lingue franche and bilingualism Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm (Based on the Historical Ethnographic Atlas of Siberia, Moscow-Leningrad, 1961) 6 colours. 1 map 109. Distribution of ethnic groups and languages in Siberia in the mid-20th Century Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm (Based on the Historical Ethnographic Atlas of Siberia, Moscow-Leningrad, 1961) 6 colours. 1 map 110. Some lingue franche and pidgins in North Siberian and North Pacific areas at the beginning of the 20th century Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm and Eugene Khelimskiy 6 colours. 2 maps 111. The far Northeast of Russia Compiled by Elena Sergeyevna Maslova and Nikolay Borisovich Vakhtin Black and white. 1 map 112. Distribution of peoples and languages in northeastern Siberia Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov (Based on maps in I. S. Gurvich Ethnic History of Northeastern Siberia, Moscow, 1966) Black and white. 5 maps: End of the 17th century - Middle of the 17th century End of the 18th century - End of the 19th century - In 1959 113. Changes in the Evenki (Tungus), Yakut and NE Paleoasiatic territories and language areas Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov (Based on maps in I. S. Gurvich Ethnic History of Northeastern Siberia, Moscow, 1966) Black and white. 7 maps: Even, middle of the 17th century - End of the 17th century - 18th century - 19th century - Yukagir, middle of the 17th centuryEnd of the 18th century - End of the 19th century

XVIII

Table of Contents

114. Changes in the Even and Yukagir territory and language areas in northeastern Siberia Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov (Based on maps in I. S. Gurvich Ethnic History of Northeastern Siberia, Moscow, 1966) Black and white. 6 maps: Evenki (Tungus) and Yakut, end of the 17th century18th century - 19th century - Northeastern Paleoasiatic, middle of the 17th century - 18th century - 19th century 115. Aboriginal language situation and contacts on Sakhalin and Kamchatka Compiled by Yekaterina Yur'yevna Gruzdeva and Aleksandr Pavlovich Volodin 6 colours. 2 maps 116. Russian-Chinese Pidgin and language situation in the Far East Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov 6 colours. 1 map 117. Early Russian settlements in northeastern Siberia Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov (Based on maps in I. S. Gurvich Ethnic History of Northeastern Siberia, Moscow, 1966) Black and white. 4 maps: 1640-1650 - End of the 17th century - End of the 18th century - 19th century Arctic Areas 118. Eskimo Interethnic Contacts: Bering Strait and Alaska area Compiled by Rein van der Voort 6 colours. 1 map 119. Eskimo Interethnic Contacts: Northeastern Canada and Greenland Compiled by Rein van der Voort 5 colours. 1 map Canada, Northwest Coast and Alaska 120. Northwest coast of North America Compiled by Peter Bakker 6 colours. 2 maps: General map of Southern half - Northern half 121. Northwest coast of North America, Southern half Compiled by Peter Bakker 6 colours. 2 maps: General map of Southern half - Northern half 122. Language families: Alaska, Canada and adjacent areas Compiled by Peter Bakker 6 colours. 1 map

Table of Contents

XIX

123. Canada and Alaska: Languages and Intercommunication Compiled by Peter Bakker 4 colours. 1 map 124. Languages and Intercommunication: Great Lakes Area Compiled by Peter Bakker 2 colours. 1 map 125. Languages of the Metis Compiled by Peter Bakker and Robert A. Papen 6 colours. 1 map 126. The impact of Pidgin Hawaiian on Eskimo and Chinook Jargon Compiled by Emanuel 1. Drechsel and Makua Kane Haunami 4 colours. 2 maps: Eskimo Jargon - Chinook Jargon 127. Russian in Alaska and in Alaskan languages Compiled by Michael Krauss 4 colours. 1 map

United States Area 128. Former American Indian lingue franche in the United States Compiled by Emanuel J. Drechsel 6 colours. 1 map 129. The Plains Sign Language in the United States Compiled by Allan W. Taylor 2 colours. 1 map

Mexico 130. Mexican Indigenous languages today Compiled by Beatriz Garza Cuar6n and Yolanda Lastra (Based on Jorge A. Suarez, 1983, and on Beatriz Gurza Cuar6n and Yolanda Lastra, 1991) 2 colours. 1 map 13 1. Sketch map of Zapotec Dialect Groupings Compiled by Doris Bartholomew 2 colours. 1 map 132. Sketch map of Mixtec Dialect Groupings Compiled by Doris Bartholomew and Beatriz Garza Cuar6n 2 colours. 1 map

XX

Table of Contents

133. Mexican Spanish: Dialectal zones Compiled by Beatriz Garza Cuar6n 2 colours. 1 map Central America 134. The spread of restructured languages in the Caribbean Compiled by John Holm 6 colours. 4 maps: 1600-1650 - 1651-1700 - 1701-1800 - After 1801 135. Carib languages Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar Black and white. 2 maps: Garifuna - Island Carib and Carib Pidgin 136. Dutch-based Creoles Compiled by Cefas van Rossem and Silvia Kouwenberg Black and white. 2 maps: Berbice Dutch in Guyana - Caribbean Negerhollands South America 137. The Quechua language Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Expansion of Quechua (1700-1800) - Modem distribution of Quechua 138. Aymaran and Coastal Tupi-Guarani: Historical Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Expansion of Aymaran languages (lOOO-1400AD) - Coastal Tupi - Guarani languages in 1500- and multilingual areas 139. The Araucanian language Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Araucanian language (16th century) and later expansionAraucanian language: present distribution 140. Aymaran languages and Quechua Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Aymaran languages: modem distribution - Quechua and Aymara contact areas 141. Western South America: Historical Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Pre-Aymaran loan contacts (before 1000AD) - West coast contacts (l5th-16th century)

Table of Contents

XXI

142. Contact languages: Ecuador and Bolivia Compiled by Pieter Muysken Black and white. 2 maps: Ecuador: distribution of Quechua and of Media lengua varieties - Range of the Callahuaya language region 143. Lowland South America: 'General languages' Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar 2 colours. 2 maps: Expansion of the Tupi and Guarani: 'general languages' Modem distribution of the Lingua Geral Amazonica

Modem Media in the Pacific Area 144. Papua New Guinea: Electronic media Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 5 colours. 1 map 145. Radio, TV and Print Media of the Cook Islands, Niue and French Polynesia Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 2 maps 146. Radio, TV and Print Media of the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Wallis and Futuna Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 4 maps 147 Radio, TV and Print Media of Palau, Federated States of Micronesia and Solomon Islands Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 2 maps 148. Radio, TV and Print Media of New Caledonia and Vanuatu Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 2 maps 149. Radio, TV and Print Media of Fiji, Tonga and Samoa Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 1 map 150. Electronic Media (Australia, New Zealand) Compiled by Malcolm Philpott 4 colours. 2 maps: Broadcasting for Remote Aboriginal Communities Scheme (BRACS) - New Zealand radio stations 151. Papua New Guinea: National Broadcasting Commission: The Kundu or Provincial 'Grassroots' Service Compiled by Malcolm Philpott Black and white. 1 map

Introduction Stephen A. Wurm

The maps included in this map volume have been arranged in more or less the same geographical and logical order as is the case with the texts in the text volume. There are some differences in this between the two volumes which reflect the fact that some subject matters are more amenable to graphic representation, i.e. can be illustrated more clearly and effectively on maps and charts than described in texts. The subject of modem media in the Pacific area and their role in intercultural communication is a case in point, with eight A3 map sheets containing a total of 15 maps devoted to it, versus only one, though very long, text. Conversely, though very rarely, some subject matters dealt with in the text volume such as New Zealand English lexis, require no maps for illustration. Major, mostly geographical, titles dividing maps and texts into groups have been more freely resorted to in the map volume than in the text volume. For instance, there is a separate group of maps dealing with Polynesian languages and language contacts in the map volume, but the relevant textual discussion has been included in the text Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands and other relevant texts. Also, each of the metropolitan languages dealt with in the Atlas have been given an individual major title in the Table of Contents of the map volume, e.g. Metropolitan language (Spanish including creole) whereas all the metropolitan languages have been subsumed under the title Metropolitan languages (including pidgins and creoles) in the Table of Contents of the text volume and similarly in the subject finder list of the text volume under the major entry word Metropolitan languages, largely to facilitate the use of the special subject finder list of the text volume.

This map volume consists of folded A3 map sheets, each of which may contain one large map, or two or more smaller maps which usually deal with related subjects. About four fifths of the map sheets contain maps in colour, but the number of black and white maps is about one third of all the maps. In the Table of Contents of the Map Volume, it is usually indicated how many maps each map sheet contains, and whether they are in colour. If there is no indication of colour, the maps on the given map sheet are black and white. If there is more than one map on a sheet, their titles are usually given in the Table of Contents under the main title of the map sheet, unless it is obvious what they are from the main title of the map sheet, or several maps are dealing with different aspects of the same subject. On each map sheet the relevant text (including the text number given in the table of contents of the text volume), the map number, and the main title of the map sheet, together with the name( s) of the compiler(s) of the map(s) is (are) given. If the map(s) on a given map sheet is (are) based on the research of the compiler(s) and/or is (are) based on what is discussed in the next text(s) relevant to that map sheet including its references, no mention is made of sources for the map(s). If the map is based on other research work and sources, this is indicated under the main title of the map sheet in the Table of Contents. Atlas volume texts relevant to a given map sheet are listed at the top of the map sheet. As has been pointed out above, there is no one-to-one correspondence between maps (or map sheets) and texts in the text volume, and one text can be relevant to several maps, and one map to several texts. At the end of each text, after the references,

XXIV

Stephen A. Wurm

maps relevant to it are listed. If of several maps on a map sheet, only one map is relevant to a given text, the title of the map sheet is mentioned at the end of that text (with relevant compilers of the maps on the map sheet if there is more than one compiler), with the title of the sectional map after

it in parentheses, e.g. "Aboriginal languages and contacts in Sakhalin and Kamchatka (Sakhalin). Compiled by Yekaterina Y. Gruzdeva and Aleksandr P. Volodin".

R~ leunt

1

tn t: 001

..........

Dleblltutlon of 1.8n.o. . . other than .n.l.... In Auetl"llile 1881·1871

•

I

-._ ,_.

I • _ _ _ _ .l . a.)

......

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

O C~

•

o

0&1".'(9 ...... . pepers) QUE ENS L AN

I~oh

SOUTH

0 '_

1J! I

~

L_.......__,

. Weloh(1_~

. M ~UIII

Ill'. I

..... . na._

• Sc:tttthIGIOeoIIC . ~

.-

D"'-~""'!~

([) MI>«KIIangU.Q...... . wllh ~""0I1I"""'1 L.O.T.E.

AUSTRALIA

i, ..... _--_._. .................../""- ..

NEW

SOUT H

WALES

\_ lPo.> __ ' ." IITTUWlMTI

2 1

_

,-J ... _ .

v """,, 1 _ H. _ I

~

a '''' ""

.--

I " , .. , "'.Co_ I

,,•__ I·_"'C_, ,," c,, ' ... _ _ ,tGo< _ _ _ ,

.-

" c_

,,,,I' w _ " ,," w__

--

, . , OW>\!

--

2' ''_

.~-

Dlst rlbutlon or Languages other than English in Australia 1861·1871

.-

l! lj11t' -.~ ~

!I

Comp ilfl1 by M. Clyne

2

Reluanl It :rl; 001

..... ..D . . . . _..........., ..Mo_'-

DI.blbutlon of La...U•••• oth.r ...... ......h In A...b." - 1....

O el •

.

a.m- CI5I"

IS;I I I

( I I " ISI~ 11

0 -

--...--...... "-

po I 'I I • • • LO.T_IE. --- ~.,

OUEENSLAND

WESTERN

AUSTRALIA

co-_ () SOUTH

AUSTRAL I A

-.

'''~=',­

r ••

Ooolg ... . W

,...',-,,

NEW

,'H

DIJlrlbut lon or Ll nl UIle5 other th i n EnaJish In Auslralll - 1891

,

w,.".00'IIII9lIIoc:-' z

_ _'''''' _ , , _ • • w. ... .. p"',."'.... '''10. _e"_,, ,_ ............. ~

3o u

0 . .. '

',,'_.

__ ,a,

CO L O NY O F VICTOR I"

o

-•• T ... S ..... NI ....

N(W

SOUTH

WAL .. S

-

,• ,• , o

• •
ooIa

. . . SOuth . . . . .

Missions,

•• d

in Aus lralla

Compiled by P. Miihihi uslu

Rltlnanl In ll, OIJ.

22

026. 021

Ps

•

..... ~_

,,)t",

'__

__ ' .. .,s....__

....

,~1' 2 '

, ~,

no,,,

) u . .,

_

,_

...

Cu0.:111

C"'"

un

,_

ffi ",

'-

." _ UK M..... • ..

sour"

ISL AN D

__ .= I : A....

wt.. ••

("O ~lh

0-o'1Mo 101_

_ _ line ...

""",,"!loon In

I,. ~

1M 1170.:

o

( . .~oh . M_ tMIII\Q ...II....

f~~:~J

Adult biNng..-Jiltl'l I l iII wlcMoptNd. bu l f.w ";11"0"" child.,n

lI iP~""

[3

- -"4:' •

D ,.!and. 101000\000' __ '.0001_1 .... _

Sou.h ,tl.nd ... _1 di,IIK' Ind

Chltham

."•

,-_.---

'

-1-,

'..... >00,"" 110... .. , _ eo.Complied by R. A.

B~nlon ,

R. Clark, J.

H(llm~J

and C.

-1000 1

~o~"::-========,:,~!:,~...==.,.=======,,,:;:::~2~6::-='F===

Relevant tut,,'

. Ilten"".

Tr.............. . .net _ of I. np.c. conbet In SOU......t P~. N_ 0,,1.,.. ~

A

ocr ...

CIFIC

dO» C G •

•

,

IIEW IRItAU

•• "

•

o ·

•

II OUH SO t OMOIi S

•

un

WUT IIEW U llA lli

IIlW IR llA11i

(Jo I I

, ,

. •

_

•

•

r." •• •

$".11

•

HTl i [ . ItIrI _

•

.... O

HTl i K ' II1II _ _ 0

0 0

r

AUST RALIA

Trade

la nguag~

and a reas

tx tensl~e

•

_ _ Io:oo go

........., •• _

(_ - ' e l y )

'-_

OC ....,-'eIy)

, CO".l

la nguage conta ct In Sout htast Pa pua Ne .. Guinta

....... _ ' - _ ........... . 1Con

•

, ,

.

~o "

... opoIo...

. .... a a conloct _ .... " ' Mtoo "'... .... a oa •

MOl . _ _ _ .... D .. g •

. ....

..

'.

Compiled by T. E. Dulton

GU

.__. -'. :

II A S S

STRAIT

.- -" ..tANI'"

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

-

•

••""_.;'.=........ r .....

I MARI_A -0

•

ISLANDS

MARSHALL • ,r •

M

I

"= •

....... , ".-

~_

,

??~c-At c.nN1Ufy) ..,. 16th _11th "*"""y (dllCQI,lII-...c1 "om ...1e 17'1h nd. ,w "' ". ."

...

•

-

.~-

lIy'*fU ' _ \ O, OIM •

MAQ

,/

'~

'--_J

MONGOLIA

CHINA

c •

-

=

lIN~~.";F::;_::~> - ....

•

,,1.""1111_... (---111 ' /

;o\~:;:;·~·· _'1·. ,

I

N

r

,1_

A

'" ,,,.po' ""

,

,\ ' _ _ (f

............. ,..

•

•

"_~ _ _ (f

>--1.1.)

TAIWAN ~1o

_ _ 1lK

-

•o

.- ~ ,

,

() Treaty po.11 ellab]llh.cl ollel opium WO'I "1 A,.o , COn llolled by foreign powe'l

Chln~se

Pidgin English in the 19th century

Compilfd by p, 8aku

.... . . . . . ..

Relevant USb:

._

53

05.

....... _

of

,.at..... of

",,~tIeI

(I.•. u_lo,. d wl1tl,ac'o .. , _ b1 , • ..tI"",

21attu,"

. . . ...

eo_ •• • •

......

"."" •• ,0.

. . . ... .......,"""".

~. -

~

. . ........ . . . ...

...

................" """...,.".....

...

.....

. ....

...

,

--

.

.......

~

.. «".. . . .

. . ...

...........

_...

...

.........

... .... _ . .. .... . . ... --.... _......... ...... ._. . ... . ...... . . . . ... ..... . ... .. . . .. . ... ........ . . . . . ... . . . . ...... ... ".... n" ...."' • • •

' ,,""

uLI

••

•,

a, P I .. to

.,

R~ leunt

•

~ O

O·

00

O ~

. ~

•

lU l l 015

oZ

.

.2 .~ ,,•, =:

" . -" ." -'

.--••

00

-• --•

."••

.',••. •• .-

"~

•

.• • •

• + / •

. I

•

••.'

,"

••'"

•

•

'I
Kiribati There are legends about an invasion from Samoa in the 13th century. There is probably a significant amount of loan words, but no research has been done. See Groves, Groves and Jacobs (1985). (12) Samoan ... > Fiji There is a possibility of influence having occurred in the Lau group, which was the part of Fiji that Samoans had most contact with. This should be compared to the strong influence from Tongan in the Lau islands. So far no research has been carried out on the former. (13) Samoan···> Futunan A curious absence of any indication of contact between these two language communities, which are geographically and linguistically very close, calls for explanation and further research. (14) Samoan···> Pukapukan There are clear cases of borrowings from Eastern Polynesian languages in Pukapukan. See Clark (1980). The linguistic similarities between Samoan and Pukapukan are mainly genetically based, but may in some cases be due to contact.

(15) Samoan···> Tuvaluan These communities are close to each other both geographically and linguistically. The Samoan invasion in Kiribati in the 13th century may also have affected Tuvaluan. (16) Tongan···> Tokelauan There are some legends and genealogical traditions about contact between Tonga and Tokelau. Since Tokelau was the smaller in population of these communities it was possibly the most likely one to be influenced. There has heen no research so far. (17) Uvean ... > Tokelauan There are some legends and genealogical traditions about contact between Uvea and Tokelau. Since Tokelau was the smaller in population of these communities it was possibly the most likely one to be influenced. Again there has been no research so far. (18) Tuvaluan ... > Kiribati Language contact is likely, due to geographical and historical contact. See Groves, Groves and Jacobs (1985). (19) Kiribati ... > Tuvaluan Linguistic contact is likely, due to geographical proximity. A number of cases can be added to Hovdhaugen's list of the Western Pacific, and additional examples of language contacts can be found in the Eastern Pacific and the Polynesian outliers. In the Western Pacific, we find the situation as described in (20)-(24) below: (20) Tongan vessels regularly visited Fiji for sandalwood. Geraghty (n.d.) mentions that a foreigner talk derived from Fijian was used in these early contacts. (21) There was Polynesian influence in New Caledonia. In an article on this topic, Hollyman (1959: 361) mentions Captain Cook reporting in 1774, that New Caledonians from Balade tried to communicate with him in a mixture of Tannese, Tongan and Maori: "This description, allied with the fact that some sort of communication was

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

possible, indicates a greater measure of intercomprehension than mere cognates would offer". (22) Tongan influence is reported on the Kwenyii language of the Isle-des-Pins as well as on Lifu, Vere and Mare in the Loyalties. (23) Garanger (1974: 14), supported by archeological evidence, is of the opinion that the Marquesans maintained contact with the rest of Polynesia after they had been settled (see also Rensch 1987: 578). (24) Wallisian influence in the Loyalties has been examined by Hollyman (1959: 363), who produces a more detailed account: A fairly substantial group of mixed, but mainly Wallis, Polynesians came to Uvea probably about 25 years before the discovery of New Caledonia by Cook in 1774. By the time Cook and D'Entrecasteaux were there, these immigrants were extending their relations to the northern coast of the mainland. Despite their apparent numbers, their influence was not great even in Uvea, and they can in no sense be regarded as a superstratum. Traditions about Tongan arrivals are vague and concern mostly drift voyages by very small numbers: they are undatable generally, but some definitely took place after European contact. As far as we know, all influence on the mainland has been indirect, coming principally from the Loyalties, but also perhaps in small measure from the Isle of Pines which had extensive, if not always friendly, relations with the south of the mainland. Within the Loyalties themselves population shifts were frequent enough for wide contact to have been made with the Polynesians present, and Mareans and Lifuans were frequently on the Isle of Pines.

Having given a basic list of language contacts in Polynesia, it now seems useful to add a few more-detailed case studies.

407

3.2.4. Selected case studies 3.2.4.1. Niuafo 'ou Among the deliberate actions promoting language contact in prehistorical days, was expansion of the sphere of political influence (a Polynesian rather than a Melanesian phenomenon). A particularly prominent example of this was the Tongan expansion in the 15th and 16th centuries. An island where the language was greatly affected by this expansion is Niuafo'ou, which lies roughly equidistant between Fiji to the west, Samoa to the east and Tonga to the south. The language of this island originally was a Samoic outlayer language, which came under intensive pressure from Tongan in prehistoric times. This pressure was continued in historical days, when the island was integrated into the modem kingdom of Tonga. T.S. Dye (1980: 349) writes: " ... these data indicate the non-Tongan language that, as early as 1922, was fast disappearing before the political and cultural authority of Tonga." Tongan imperialism is also the reason for language mixing on islands further away, among the Samoic outliers, including Uvean, Tikopia and Anuta. To our knowledge no comparative account of the linguistic impact of Tongan expansion has been compiled to date. 3.2.4.2. Niue Niuean is generally classified as an offshoot of the same major language family as Tongan. However, there are studies indicating that, subsequent to the original settlement from Tonga, there are other later influences from Nuclear Polynesia, possibly Samoan. Kumitau and Hekau (1982: 84) present the following account: The historians take over from the linguistic experts and talk about waves of migration from Tonga and Samoa. Some say our moieties, Motu in the northern half of the Island and Tafiti in the south could be either Tongan or Samoan originally. It seems at the moment inconclusive-all that can be said for certain is that our origins seem to be both Tongic and Samoic words

408

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

used by the experts for Tongan and Samoan culture and language before they developed many of their now distinctive differences. One thing worth noting is the comments by many Europeans in the first years, after coming here, about the Melanesian strain that seemed to be mixed in the Tafiti, the southern moiety of our Island. Again, if this is true, both Samoa and Tonga in their history had much contact with Fiji-and the experts have hinted at migration from the parts of Samoa and Tonga more affected by Fiji which would explain the name Tafiti better. So much in this area is speculation on certain facts which provide a setting for the oral tradition of our beginnings which we have set down. Happily the two areas, oral tradition and modern techniques in tracing our origins, give us a greater pride in our beginnings and tell us something about them. It is left open whether contacts between Niue and

the outside world were one-way occupation and settlement or ongoing trade links. 3.2.4.3. Eastern Polynesia According to Dening (1972: 109-110) there was only one extensive contact area in Eastern Polynesia, the Society and the N orth-West Tuamotu groups:

The overall impression is that the contacts of the Marquesans were limited to their own group, and this despite the legends collected later of voyages to Rimatara, Rarotonga, Tubuai, Tongatapu, Fiji, Hawaii, Upolu and Borabora. There is one notable exception to this view, mentioned by Porter. He claimed that the Marquesans were so confident in the existence of land to the west and its luxuriant abundance that specific examples, such as that of the grandfather of his informant, "Gattanewa", who sailed off with others of the family in four canoes provisioned with hogs and

poultry. They were never heard of again. Over eight hundred men, women and children were reported to have left in this way over a short period. This might explain why the Tahitians, occupying a natural landfall to the south-west, had knowledge of the Marquesans and yet the Marquesans' knowledge was narrow. So far as the written evidence allows us to conclude, there was only one extensive contact area in East Polynesia, the Society-NW Tuamotu groups. Cook remarked that the Tuamotuans were frequently visiting Tahiti and the other islands of the group, and both missionaries and explorers met visiting Tuamotuans at Tahiti. "Pujoro", a Tahitian interpreter, told the Spaniards that he had several times sailed among the Tuamotu in search of pearls. Undoubtedly, the attractions of high island produce brought the coral islander on what must have been an easy sailing trip with the trade winds behind them and the west winds in season to blow them back. The Tuamotuans themselves led a nomadic life in the low islands. Their canoes, despite their difficulty in obtaining wood, were among the best and biggest in Polynesia. The low islands only supported small populations, which necessitated general movement. 3.2.4.4. Easter Island Over the years, Easter Island has attracted more scholarly attention than almost any other island because: (1) it occupies a key position to test the question

of contact between South America and the Pacific Ocean; (2) it has been said to be the purest example of a totally isolated language developing for more than a thousand years; (3) it has been examined as an example where Eastern and Western Polynesian traditions have mixed. The important summary of Tryon and Langdon (1979) left open the possibility of whether trade

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

contact existed with South America or not. Following an investigation of all existing sources, Fischer (1991) makes a strong case dismissing ancient substratum languages or multiple-wave theories of migration. He concludes: Consistent with the archaeological, anthropological' and genetic data available to date is the verdict here that in the oldest Rapanui documents there is not a shred of linguistic evidence for a non-Polynesian substrate or a second Polynesian wave of settlers on the island. Indeed, the cumulative linguistic evidence also argues one, surprisingly early, East Polynesian settle-ment of Rapanui, most likely from the Marquesas Islands. Our standard settle-ment theory still explains the origin of this evidence in the most economic fashion that waives stratified borrowing. The Polynesians were truly the first inhabitants of the eastern half of the Pacific. and Laying ad acta once and for all the "nonPolynesian substrate" and "second Polynesian wave" theories to realise that one boatload of East Polynesians were the first and only ones to arrive on Rapanui until their descendants' encounter with Europeans in 1722, we must necessarily infer some 1400 years of total isolation on what represented the globe's most isolated inhabited spot until the opening of Antarctica in the 20th century. On both counts-geographically and in terms of time-depth-this is apparently the most extreme case of isolation known to linguistics. The Rapanui language is indeed worthy of international regard. (Fischer 1991: 7-8)

409

Pukapuka shows some evidence of borrowing from other Cook Islands languages, including some grammatical features, though its basic structure is unquestionably Samoic. Elsewhere in East Polynesia the relatively wide separation of island groups would lead one to expect less borrowing, while the relatively close relatedness of the languages makes its detection all the more difficult. Green has suggested borrowing from Tahitian into Hawaiian to account for discrepancies in the distribution of evidence for his Tahitic subgroup. This would presumably be correlated with the often postulated "second migration" of Tahitians to Hawaii. There is no intrinsic evidence that the forms in question are borrowed, however; and their distribution can easily be explained in other ways. 3.2.4.6. Polynesian Outliers The Polynesian outliers in the Melanesian area are generally regarded not as colonies left behind during pre-historical migration from east to west, but as secondary settlements resulting from deliberate and accidental voyages from the Polynesian triangle. Whilst some such voyages ended up on uninhabited islands where their linguistic traditions of Samoic could develop further, others terminated among speakers of Melanesian or Papuan languages. In yet other cases, consec-utive settlement complicated the linguistic picture. These languages remain relatively under-researched. But we do have information on a few instances of longer lasting intercultural contacts, which are mentioned below:

This conclusion, however, does not preclude weak trade links with the outside world.

(a) Rennellese Elbert (1962: 28-29) has pointed out that Rennell was originally inhabited by speakers of a different language, the Hiti, who provided a number of substantive features for Rennellese:

3.2.4.5. Pukapuka and Hawaiian Grace (1978: 38) has summarized the situation as follows:

Are there, indeed, two strata in the language ... one Polynesian, and the other non-Polynesian and perhaps an acqui-

410

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

sition, or substratum, or the legacy of the hiti? ..In earlier days students were rather quick to posit strata in Polynesia; then followed a conservative reaction. Even a cautious student of the history of Rennell, however, might suggest such a hypothesis here. Blust (1987: 76), in examining Elbert's evidence, arrived at the following assessment: In conclusion, a distinctive South-east Solomonic language in which POC *t and *s had merged as a liquid (probably 11/) was spoken on Rennell and Bellona when the ancestors of the present population arrived. This language apparently was not a member of the Cristobal-Malaitan group, but its positive connections remain unclear. Its speakers (the "Hiti" of Rennellese tradition) were ultimately exterminated by the invading Polynesians, but not before leaving a lasting impression on the language of their conquerors and successors. Dening (1972: 151) mentions deliberate contacts between San Cristobal (Solomons) and Rennell Island. Further details are given by Terrell (1986: 110). (b) Emae and Mele-Fila Additional examples of the above-mentioned category of contacts with non-Polynesian populations outside Polynesia are also documented for Vanuatu (New Hebrides). Clark (1986) has documented that the two Polynesian outlier languages Emae and Mele-Fila in central Vanuatu have undergone extensive influence from surrounding Melanesian languages, whilst having contributed relatively little to the Melanesian languages of the area, a reflection of the numerical superiority of the Melanesians. The importance of Clark's study lies in his demonstration that the lexical and grammatical core, rather than the periphery, was affected by this contact. The history of the Polynesian languages, as can be seen from this incomplete survey, is not

the canonical case of language diversification and development in isolation-except in a small number of cases-but one of continued contact and of mutual influence. The reasons for this are many, ranging from the need to exchange commodities to the exercise of political power, and from wanderlust to accidents (drift voyages). With more powerful analytic tools and more information becoming available, plus the use of computer simulation, such as that used by Terrell (1983), a clearer picture of past contacts is beginning to emerge. Hence, it is argued that a revision or abandonment of the family tree is necessitated, and its replacement by new, more powerful metaphors that explain the complex picture of the area.

3.3. Rotuma The complexities of language contacts can be illustrated with the not fully understood case of Rotuma. Dening (1972: 128-129) mentions contacts between Rotuma, Tuvalu, Fiji and Tonga, all of which involved deliberate two-way voyages. He also lists other less reliably documented ones in his list of 215 routes connecting the islands of Polynesia. The Rotuman language is considered to be non-Polynesian, probably closer to Fijian than any other language, though attempts to give it a definite place in the family tree of Oceanic languages have had at best indeterminate outcomes. The present-day linguistic composition of this language reflects a long history of contacts with the outside, and occupation of the island by outsiders subsequent to its original settlement. In an important article Biggs (1965) has documented some of the linguistic affiliations of Rotuma to surrounding Polynesian languages, coming up with the following conclusion: Of 328 Rotuman words with etymologies, 124 (38%) are directly inherited, 107 (33%) are indeterminable, and ninetyseven (29%) are indirectly inherited. The last figure indicates the massive nature of Polynesian influence on Rotuman,

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

influence which has not been confined to non-basic vocabulary, for of the fifty-eight items on the 200-word basic vocabulary list which contain diagnostic reflexes fifteen (25.5%) are borrowed. If, on the grounds that they are probably directly inherited, twenty-eight basic words containing I are added to the forty-three words which are definitely in this category, the percentage of indirectly inherited words drops to eighteen, a figure which is possibly low, since we have now been less rigorous in defining the directly inherited component. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the proportion of borrowed to inherited words is about the same in the whole 200-word list as it is in the eighty-three words with diagnostic reflexes, and to conclude that at least 18% of Rotuman basic vocabulary is borrowed. The same reasoning and calculations applied to the total reconstructed vocabulary suggests that 43% of the recognizably Oceanic portion of Rotuman lexicons results from external (mainly Polynesian) influence. (pp 412413)

The main contacts in prehistoric times appear to have been with the Samoan-Tongan area. The linguistic picture is further complicated by intensive contacts with Fiji in historical times. 3.4. Melanesia 3.4.1. General remarks A full account of prehistorical language contacts in New Guinea, the Solomons, Vanuatu and New Caledonia, or even a brief summary of what has been written about this topic, would fill volumes. We are dealing with an area where a very large number of languages are spoken in a relatively small space, with an almost endless array of possibilities through long linguistic contact in a settlement history of more than 40,000 years in some areas. Generally speaking, the older Papuan population was found in New Guinea, parts of the Bismarck Archipelago and on Bougainville in the

411

Solomons, as suggested by archeological evidence (in the distribution of the waisted nonpolished axe). The Melanesian languages of this area and their linguistic status have been discussed by Ross (1988). Later incursions of Austronesian speakers have led to numerous and typologically diverse language contact situations. Many earlier attempts to make sense of the complex linguistic picture of the area have relied heavily on the family tree metaphor and the role that language contact has played has not always been properly acknowledged. Our way of proceeding here will be as follows: (1) we shall single out some of the many solutions to intercultural communication; (2) we shall discuss some prominent examples for some of these solutions; (3) we shall concentrate on deliberate and voluntary attempts of contact, and not so much on the results of disasters, displacements and conflicts.

Generally speaking, a solution to the problem of how to communicate with someone who does not share one's language can take a number of forms: (1) silent barter; (2) communication through interpreters; (3) dual-, bi- or multilingualism; (4) the use of another 'full' language known to both parties (i.e. lingua franca); and finally, and most important for the purpose of this text, (5) the development of a pidgin language. Historically, all of the above solutions have been documented for one or the other part of the Pacific. The choice of what solution to adopt is determined by many other considerations (apart from those of structural linguistic), including, for example: (1) the length of institutionalization of contacts; (2) the number of groups involved; (3) the degree of intimacy between the groups; (4) patterns of dominance;

412

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

(5) the size of the groups concerned; (6) the purpose of communication. Thus, for infrequent exchange of a small range of commodities, silent barter is sufficient. For regular marriages across two speech communities, bilingualism is a more viable solution, as is communication through an interpreter for regular high-level institutionalized contacts. However, the development of pidgin languages is favoured by the presence of a large number of different groups, by the wish to maintain relative non-intimacy and often, though not always, by the dominant status of one of the groups in the contact situation. It is a combination of such factors that we frequently find in Melanesia, particularly in Papua New Guinea. This contrasts with the less conducive circumstances generally found in Polynesia, and hence the relatively lower occurrence of pidgin language development. Melanesia is probably the world's most complex linguistic ecology, with a long history of language contacts. Reconstructing its linguistic past is an awesome task indeed and the combination of hundreds of languages and only a small number of linguists investigating them accounts for many residual unsolved puzzles. It is not possible to survey all published work on language contacts of the area, but we hope to have brought together here, some of the best and most interesting cases. 3.4.2. Multilingualism and intercultural communication in New Caledonia Guiart (1953) offers a graphic description and a complex map of integral communication in New Caledonia before the arrival of the Europeans. The centre section of the island, in particular, has been one of long-standing and intensive contacts. It comes as no surprise that attempts to reconstruct conventional family trees for the language area here had run into many problems and that the languages were consequently classified as 'aberrant', a label that expresses the outside observers' prejudices rather than any inherent abnormality of these languages or their speakers.

Hollyman (1962: 322-323) discusses some of the linguistic consequences of these prehistoric contacts between languages in New Caledonia and the particular egalitarian nature of this bilingualism: In this area, where the number of people speaking a given tongue was relatively small, marriages very frequently involved speakers of different languages or dialects. As a result, not only was bilingualism a normal characteristic of the New Caledonian, leading to change of language in a given area, but also it played an important role in providing the social mechanism for phonemic borrowing between the dialects and languages. Now this type of bilingualism is different from that with which we have at times been concerned today. The bilingualism that results from conquest by a technically superior power is one of prestige language to inferior language, and the question of survival of one or the other is always involved. In Roman Gaul, Latin eliminated Celtic; later the languages of the conquering Germanic peoples disappeared and Gallo-Romance survived, just as in England it was English that won, not Anglo-Norman. In this New Caledonian situation, however, the bilingualism was, to use Haudricourt's term, "egalitarian". As Leenhardt said: "the knowledge of several languages was one of the essential elements of indigenous culture". Phonemic borrowing was normal, and did not involve any matter of prestige whatsoever. Haudricourt explains the phonemic wealth of these languages by this "egalitarian" bilingualism of small groups. Linguistically, this bilingualism had two main effects: the phonemic borrowing already mentioned, and the use of synonymous expressions, especially in oral literature, one of the expressions being local, the other borrowed. The linguistic information recorded by Cook and the

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

Forsters when they discovered New Caledonia in 1774 shows that this "egalitarian" policy had been adopted towards the language of Polynesian visitors and immigrants from Uvea in the Loyalty Islands, and that Balad had borrowed the Uvea f. (Hollyman 1962: 322-323) Grace (1981: 258-259) addresses the problem of large scale contact and borrowing between related languages (indirect inheritance) making the important point that no postulated contact between Austronesian and non-Austronesian language is necessary to cause aberrancy: However, in many parts of Oceania, New Caledonia among them, most languages are spoken in close proximity to one or more related languages. In such circumstances, indirect inheritance must be regarded as a significant possibility. It seems likely, therefore, that some of my hypothetical cognate pairs and the sound correspondences which appear in them may be due to such indirect inheritance. For example, such a pair might consist of a form which had been retained from the proto-language by, say, Grand Couli but lost by Canala and then acquired again through borrowing from a third related language. The hypothetical cognate pair would then consist of the indirectly inherited Canala form and the directly inherited Grand Couli form. With indirect inheritance brought into the picture, the range of possibilities rapidly increases. For example, the hypothetical indirectly inherited form in Canala might have come from any of several different nearby languages, or it might have been the Grand Couli language which had the indirectly inherited form (and again, from any of several possible sources, or the hypothetical cognates in both of the languages might have been borrowed).

413

Grace (1981: 260) continues to point out that European notions of what constitutes a language, and the family tree metaphor of arranging them, have been major obstacles in understanding how communication took place in New Caledonia: There is, however, a quite different perspective on these languages which I would like to introduce into the discussion. In this perspective, the languages of a larger area are seen as constituting a single whole rather than as so many separate entities. The impression which I get when I consider a larger area (I do not want to try to be very specific here, but the area which I have mainly in mind would include the entire south of New Caledonia or at least a large part of it) is one of striking uniformity in some respects and diversity in others. One is tempted to suggest that the languages of the area as a whole might be made the object of a single linguistic description-that those languages have a single grammatical system (with no variation greater than might be expected of dialects of the same language), a single phonological system (with each language operating with a selection from the phoneme inventory of the system as a whole), and a single vocabulary except for a proliferation of synonyms (with each language, again, operating with a selection from the inventory of synonymous forms). The foregoing remarks might seem to suggest that we are dealing with a single dialectally differentiated language. But on the other hand, all observers agree in identifying a number of different languages, cognate counts among them are surprisingly low (cf. Dyen 1965), and, furthermore, there is the previously discussed difficulty in even determining the sound correspondences among the different languages. We have a seemingly paradoxical association of unity and diversity. How can that be?

414

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

To describe the situation in another way, we might say that there seem to be two kinds of systems or two loci of systematicity, one being the individual language but the other being the linguistic resources of the area as a whole. Our traditional approach to linguistic diachrony has given a central position to the individual language. The latter is assumed to be the entity which persists over time and which, as a unit, undergoes linguistic changes (otherwise we are supposedly dealing with an incipient linguistic split). What I want to propose here is that both kinds of systematicity are quite real, and that, although historical linguistics has in a sense gotten away with recognizing only one locus of systematicity, its success in doing so has depended upon favourable circumstances~ircumstances where the systematization at the level of the language is pre-eminent over that at the level of the area. And I suggest that in New Caledonia and probably other parts of Melanesia we have found circumstances so unfavourable to the traditional approach that it can no longer be stretched to fit them. (Grace, 1981: 260) But then, in the absence of actual documented data, this offers a speculative account of language contacts urging that more research be undertaken

and that, for the explanation of these phenomena, we should look for a new metaphor. Miihlhausler (1988: 3-5), in fact, offers such a new metaphor: My own suggestions for such a new metaphor are twofold: a less radical revision which continues to utilize the idea of family trees and families, and a more radical one which emphasizes the interrelations between languages and the process of communication and deemphasizes the role of individual linguistics systems. Regarding the former, family trees need to be extended to cater for convergent development and interbreeding between members of different as well as same generations. Relatedness between different languages of a family can be captured best by using a Wittgensteinian notion of 'family resemblances' rather than conceiving of languages as similar because of a shared set of constant properties. Such a view would also allow for a distinction between prototypical and more marginal members of a family of languages. Diagrammatically, the new family tree would look somewhat like the one I suggested for a group of English-derived Pacific Pidgin languages many years ago (which explains why some of the details seem somewhat out of date):

Chinese P,idgin English

,

•

", Pac;ific J'lrgon Engli,sh., ""

indirect or weak .. -------- linguistic influence - - - - direct mutual influence

Queensland ,,' Plantation

Pidlgin~English ( \

Papuan Pidgin English

~

""

'\

,/ New caledonian i Plantation

..

Pidgin

Engl~~,~.,,::),/;,>-" Pidgin E~,~liSh

"..

.'"

"",

\ "'.. Samoan : , / Plantation

...,," ",,/

,

Torres Straits /Solomon Islands Pidgin English / Pidgin English

New Hebridean Bichelamar

\,

-

New Guinea Tok Pisin

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

The principal parameter that distinguished this suggestion from the more radical alternative is the absence of gradients. Languages, including contact pidgins, are regarded as separate entities with determinate boundaries. Whilst the modified family metaphor could sol ve some of Grace's problems of accounting for simultaneous similarities and diversity, it is not appropriate for language and dialect chains such as are common throughout Australia and Melanesia. I suggest we approach this situation through a restaurant metaphor or, more precisely, by regarding the area as covered by different chains of restaurants, McDonald's, Chicken World, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Big Rooster and so forth. The members of each chain, whilst exhibiting certain idiosyncrasies derived from those who operate individual franchises, are related by numerous financial, social and human ties. Moreover, their relationship with other restaurant chains is defined by the rules of business competition, the wish to both imitate and improve on the competitors' performance and by numerous contacts between both customers and personnel. I am not going to develop this metaphor at any length nor do I wish to claim that it is not without shortcomings, rather, my point has been that, in order to break out of the established comparative paradigm, it is necessary to combine new findings with new lateral ways of accounting for them. The problem of understanding the contact history of New Caledonia remains to be solved and a solution could greatly help understand (comparable) situations of language chains in Vanuatu (Tryon, 1979) and in the New Guinea Highlands. 3.4.3. Language contacts and pidginization in Papua New Guinea In describing these, we need to distinguish between a number of types, as set out below (see

415

also Tom Dutton's Atlas text Other pidgins in Papua New Guinea): (1) Types arising out of contact between speakers of Austronesian (AN) and other languages (there have been few cases of a pidgin arising out of contact between one AN language and another). These we shall refer to as AN-based pidgins even though the term is not quite accurate, implying as it does that the resulting pidgin derives most of its vocabulary and grammatical structure from an AN language. (2) Types arising out of contact between nonAustronesian (or Papuan) (NAN) and other languages. These we shall refer to as Papuanbased pidgins. In addition we shall use the term 'pidgin' rather loosely to save unnecessarily complicating the description. Readers who are particularly interested in finer theoretical points are referred to the original sources that appear in the bibliography, for further information. There is little known of the former class of ANbased pidgin languages. Next to a simplified foreigner-talk version of Motu (see Dutton 1985; Taylor 1978), there is the language first reported by Hees (1915-16: 48-49) to have been used by the Tolai (which he refers to as Tuna) in trading (mainly for shells) with the eastern Nakanai around Open Bay on the north-east coast of New Britain. However it was unclear whether the kind of linguistic situation referred to by Hees was one of passive bilingualism or dual-lingualism such as is commonly found elsewhere in Papua New Guinea (see Lincoln 1979-80) or whether this socalled trade language was merely a dialectal variant of Tolai or some simplified form of it. Thus in his report Hees (p.49) claims that his informant said that "the coastal inhabitants of the Gazelle come to us and babble away and so do we", and to illustrate the kinds of things said and the nature of the trade language he published five short parallel sentences in it, Nakanai and what is today known as Meramera, a language distinct from Nakanai, according to Ross (1988). Unfortunately this data was not sufficient, nor of such a kind, as to allow answers to any questions posed with confidence. However the data suggest

416

P. Milhlhausler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, J. Williams, S. A. Wurm

that it was most likely not a pidgin but a fully fledged language. This has now been confirmed by Dutton and Ross (1992) who looked at Hees' statements and data again against the background of the at present much deeper understanding of the language situation of the area concerned which resulted from the comprehensive work by Ross (1988). Hees had made reference to four separate languages in his article, but did it in a manner which implied that there were only two. Dutton and Ross identified the four separate languages as what are today known as Nakanai, Meramera, Tolai and Minigir. The trade language data given by Hees contain a large element from the Minigir language. Of the four languages of which all belong to what Ross (1988) refers to as the MesoMelanesian linkage of Oceanic Austronesian languages, Nakanai and Meramera are members of the Willaumez family within it, whereas Tolai and Minigir belong to the South New IrelandlNorthwest Solomonic network within the linkage. The five short parallel sentences given by Hees are in his trade language, and what are now known as Nakanai and Meramera. From their careful analysis, Dutton and Ross conclude that the trade language is largely Minigir, a conservative sister language of Tolai. Only two plural pronouns of the trade language appear to belong to Meramera and Nakanai. Simplifications and adaptations to the trade partners' language are to be expected in a trade language. There are some in the very small corpus available, but they are minor, some phonological, and two morphosyntactic. One particular feature in the language may constitute a feature of pidginization. Therefore, Hees' trade language was hardly a pidgin language, even if it contained one feature that could be a pidginization feature. Schlesier (1991) discusses the use of Manus as a lingua franca of the Manus archipeligo. Better known is the old trade language of the Dobu. In recent decades, a pidginised form of the Dobu language of the D'Entrecasteaux Islands, has become used as the language of the labour line in the Milne Bay Province and in the areas adjacent to it. It is known as Gosiagu Talk. The number of

its speakers may be estimated to run into quite a few thousand. AN-based pidgins employed with speakers of NAN languages are also few and their documentation is rather uneven. So far four have been reported 1: (1) the Mekeo Trading Language (lmunga variety) (2) the Mekeo Trading Language (loi variety) (3) the Mekeo Trading Language (Maipa variety) (4) the Siassi Trading Language. Of these, only the first two have been documented in any way. Of the last two, the Maipa variety of the Mekeo Trading Language was extinct at the time of its 'discovery' and no data are available (Jones 1985). However, given what we know about the other two Mekeo-based pidgins described below, the Maipa variety was probably very similar in nature and very closely related to the other two. The Siassi trading language is reported by Harding (1967: 6,203) to have been a pidginised form of Siassi known as tok Siassi haphap which was used for trading with other islanders and coastal peoples of the mainland nearby. However, as no data were published on this putative pidgin and as it has not been investigated further since, it is still unclear whether this was indeed a pidgin language or merely one group's way of describing the linguistic relationship between two normal languages. The Mekeo trade languages were pidgin languages (Jones 1985). They grew up out of contact between speakers of different dialects of the AN Mekeo language and the neighbouring NAN Kunimaipa language. As such they were very similar in structure and virtually variants of each other. Unlike the Hiri trading languages, discussed in a latter section, which derived most of their structures from the Papuan languages in contact with Motu, these Mekeo trade 'languages' derived most of their structure from Mekeo. Like the Hiri trading languages, on the other hand, these 'languages' fell into disuse following European contact. As has been pointed out before (Dutton 1990), this number of reported pidgins is surprisingly

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

small given the linguistic diversity of Papua New Guinea and the number of trading networks in which there was contact between AN and other languages. Although the reasons for this are unclear some of those that are probably the most important are: (l) that pidgin languages have not been considered worthy of any attention by linguists until recently and have therefore been ignored in the past; (2) that where trading was between neighbouring groups, bi- or multilingualism took care of the problem of communication. Whilst contact between different Austronesian languages may not have resulted in pidginization, there are numerous other outcomes that deserve mention here. Contacts among Austronesian languages have been recognized by a number of scholars in the business of reconstructing their past. Chowning (1986: 429), addressing some of the general issues involved here, observes: If my interpretation is correct, the relationship between languages can become much more complex than the usual tree model indicates, particularly because in some regions the paths of migration, deliberate and accidental, are so tangled. All of the historic evidence suggests that a considerable stretch of the north coast of New Guinea, including the offshore islands, has been subject to constant movements of people. Because so many different languages are involved and because some of them are closely related, the results are much more difficult to disentangle than, for example, in some parts of Polynesia. The relation between Gitua and its neighbours, including the languages of the Siassi Islands, is probably better represented as a series of overlapping circles than as a tree. Which part of the circles constitutes the core may be very difficult to ascertain. I feel dubious about the validity of several of the larger subgroups that have been proposed for both the Madang and Morobe regions because the varying sorts of

417

resemblances between languages assigned to the same subgroup suggest that the effects of population mixing and borrowing have not been distinguished from those resulting from descent from a single proto-language. Lithgow (1987: 405), in his research on a number of languages of the Milne Bay area, comes to similar conclusions: It would seem that all of the languages under discussion are now mixtures, and the sources of their historical origin have become blurred. The Suau family is a fairly closely related group, and so is the Duau family if Tubetube is excluded, but Kurada shows significant similarity with Suau, the east coast of Duau peninsula shows some Tubetube influence, and the rest of the Duau family shows strong Dobu influence. The Saliba dialect of Suau shows similarity with Tubetube, but it is declining under pressure from standard Suau. Tubetube's situation is similar to that of another island group of trading people, the Gumasi speakers on the Amphlett Islands. I classified Gumasi as a linguistic isolate. Gumasi people trade with the people of Kiriwina, Goodenough, north Fergusson (3 languages) and Dobu, and speak all their languages. The Gumasi language has points of similarity with many other languages, and close similarity to none. Gumasi is different in that very few outsiders speak it, whereas many outsiders know and use Tubetube. It is actually a lingua franca for the south-east coast of Normanby Island from Kwanaula to Kurada. The Tubetube people trade with Misima, Muyuw, Dobu, Duau, Tawala and Suau, and older men are fluent in most or all of these languages, and some others as well. Their language has some elements which seem unique, plus a strong mixture of Duau and Suau (the Duau being a little

418

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

stronger in these data), and also some elements of Misima, Muyuw, Dobu and Tawala. Perhaps, like Gumasi, it should be classified as a linguistic isolate. Finally, Holzknecht (1989: 15-16) comments on the difficulties she experienced when trying to fit her data into traditional categories such as 'pidgin' and 'mixed language'. It is not my intention in this work to enter into the 'pidginisation' versus 'mixed languages' debate. However, a few points need to be made here about the behaviour of languages in contact. My observations of the 15 languages of the Markham, and of some of their Austronesian and Papuan neighbours, indicate that in this inland area, any language is in contact at any time with at least one other language, and any culture is in touch with at least one other. These contacts are sometimes sought, as in marriage connections or trade activities, or unsought as in a refugee group becoming clients in another group, or in a patron group receiving refugees from another language. All these contacts necessitate linguistic accommodation. The direction of this accommodation depends on many factors. Social pressures such as which is the language with highest prestige at any time and the status of affines within any community can affect the direction of linguistic accommodation. Linguistic pressures such as markedness of features and complexity of structures can affect the direction of linguistic accommodation. To say that languages which accommodate each other in these ways are 'pidginised' is incorrect in this context, according to definitions from such writings as Mtihlhausler (1974, 1987). To say that they are 'mixed' is also not correct, as the idea of 'mixing' implies the existence of some 'pure' languages which are thus diluted by each other. If this is the case, then there is no such pure and perfect linguistic entity in

the geographical or linguistic area of this present study. The complexities encountered with Austronesian languages are very much in evidence with Papuan languages as well, as Jeff Williams illustrates in the following section. 3.4.4. The special case of Papuan-based pidgins It is only in the past few years that information on Papuan-based pidgins has begun to surface. 2 The limited availability of such information has led to the absence of any discussion concerning these varieties in Holm's recent (1989) reference survey of the world's pidgin and creole languages. The purpose of the present discussion is to provide a preliminary inventory of the Papuan-based pidgins of insular New Guinea. The term 'Papuan-based pidgins' refers to a set of secondary contact languages whose input languages are classified as Non-Austronesian or Papuan. 3 These languages are of particular theoretical importance for a number of reasons; most notably because they exhibit several features not normally ascribed to pidgin languages. Some have complex morphologies relative to those usually found in pidgins, especially those based on Indo-European languages (see Foley 1988a). Relatively free word order is present in many Papuan-based pidgins. We also find verbally artistic forms such as myths and songs which deal with the origins of these varieties (see ConradMinch 1989; Williams 1989a). Finally, in terms of language use, there are special discourse styles or 'ways of speaking' (see Hymes 1974), used by speakers in trading situations. It is necessary to provide this information, albeit incomplete, at the present time since many of these languages have only one or two remaining active speakers. Consequently, fieldwork on these languages is an urgent priority. There is a general desire on the part of many speakers to preserve these pidgins. Cassette recorders are accessible to some and cassette tapes provide a semi-permanent record for future generations. The Institute of Papua New Guinea Studies in Boroko, Papua New Guinea, functions

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

as a repository for tapes such as these as well as any other information. In the following sections we outline all information known about these Papuan-based pidgins. Genetic affiliations of the languages involved are given as well as any information regarding the social setting of contact. Arguably the best documented language in this category is pidginized Yimas. Information on pidginized Yimas can be found in Foley (1986a, 1988) and Williams (1989a, 1989b). Pidginized Yimas is particularly interesting because multiple varieties have developed, each one being used with a trading partner from a different linguistic community. In some cases these linguistic communities coincide with villages but in other cases they do not (see Foley in press for more on linguistic allegiance in the Sepik region). At one time these different varieties were owned by different clans along with trading rights to villages within well-defined territories. For example, the paimban clan owned the trading rights to villages along the Karawari River, including those near its intersection with the Sepik River. Concomitantly, they were the ones who knew the varieties of pidginized Yimas used between the Karawari, Iatmul, and Alamblak-speaking peoples. Genetically, Yimas belongs to the Lower Sepik family. It is a polysynthetic language with complex verbal morphology and a complex nominal classification system, with over twelve noun classes, which is both semantically and phonologically organized. The number of Yimas speakers has never been great, and at the present time they number about 250 (Foley 1986a: 214). In pre-contact times, the Yimas lived in one village; however, nowadays they are split into two villages about ten kilometres apart . The second pidgin to be mentioned here is the Yimas-Arafundi trade pidgin, once used between Yimas and the Arafundi-speaking village of Auwim. It has been characterized by Foley (l986a, 1988a) as a stable pidgin with insignificant interspeaker variability between speakers of Yimas and Arafundi. However, the ways of speaking differ considerably between the two groups. The Yimas-Arafundi trade pidgin also

419

exhibits vanatIOn in relation to the dialectal situation of Arafundi, where at least seven different dialects have been discovered. These dialects correspond with hamlets and might more correctly be referred to as comrnunalects. Arafundi has been classified as belonging to the Ramu stock (Laycock 1973a). Very little information has been published on the language, with only a word list appearing in Haberland (1966). Typologically, Arafundi is a typical Highlands Papuan language with switch reference, medial verbs, case marking on nouns, and the like. Structurally, the Yimas-Arafundi pidgin is simplified Yimas with lexical input from Arafundi. Very little grammatical input from Arafundi is evidenced in the pidgin. Features such as switch reference and the use of medial verbs in extended discourse are absent from the pidgin. A third pidgin in the Yimas area is YimasAlamblak. Information on the Yimas-Alamblak trade pidgin once used between Yimas and the Alamblak-speaking village of Chimbut can be found in Williams (l989a). Among the Alamblak, there is only one remaining active speaker of the pidgin, and he now lives in Maramba, although passive speakers can be found in Amongabi as well as a few in Chimbut, the village where the pidgin has its origins. Structurally, this pidgin differs from the Yimas-Arafundi pidgin. The Yimas-Alamblak pronominal system is much more simplified than that of the Yimas-Arafundi pidgin. The YimasAlamblak system does not distinguish singulars from plurals, creating a set of three pronouns for first, second and third person. Lexically as well, this variety differs from the Yimas-Arafundi variety. Interestingly enough, many of the lexical items derive from Karawari. In the trade conducted between these two groups, the Yimas provided tobacco, fish, baskets, and canoes in exchange for sago, pigs, cassowaries, and other minor trade items as well. Alamblak is a member of the Sepik Hills language family, which may in tum be distantly related to the Ndu languages, of which Iatmul is an important member (Foley 1986a).

420

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

Typologically, Alamblak is a polysynthetic language with complex verbal morphology, a switch reference system, and a two-way gender classification system. The gender classification system is not preserved in the pidgin. A fourth Yimas-related pidgin is YimasKarawari. Documentation on the pidginized Yimas used between Yimas and the Karawarispeaking villages along the Karawari River can be found in Williams (1989a). The main Karawari village that the Yimas traded with was Kundiman. Since Karawari does exhibit extensive dialectal variation, it seems that the kind of dialectal variation present for the Yimas-Arafundi situation will also be found within the Yimas-Karawari situation. Genetically, Yimas and Karawari are closely related as both belong to the Lower Sepik family. According to Foley (1988a), they are related along the lines of German and Dutch. Karawari has had an important impact on the grammar of pidginized Yimas. A final Yimas-related pidgin is Yimas-Iatmul. Some older Yimas men remember the use of a trade language between Yimas and the Iatmul villages of Mindimbit and Angriman on the Sepik River. The only man with any knowledge of this pidgin belongs to the paimban clan, whose origins are in the area near those Iatmul villages on the Karawari River. The trade that flourished between the paimban clan and the Iatmul was extended to the area of present-day Yimas after the consolidation of several clans into the Yimas group proper. 4 The paimban clan exchanged flying fox skins and bones, woven sleeping baskets and mats, betel nut, lime, mustard peppers, and spears, for tobacco provided by the Iatmul. There are other Papuan pidgins that should be mentioned here, particularly the well documented Hiri trade languages which included the Eleman and Koriki varieties (see also Tom Dutton's Atlas text Hiri trading languages). These trade languages developed out of contact between the AN Motu of the Port Moresby area and their NAN trading partners in the Gulf of Papua (Dutton 1983, 1985). The Motu visited the gulf annually

to trade clay pots and other valuables for sago, canoe logs, and lesser products. On these voyages, called hiri, the Motu spent about three months in the gulf while they constructed larger canoes for the return journey. Their trading partners lived in villages at the mouths of the many large rivers that flow into the sea around the gulf. One group of these occupy the delta of the Purari River and are known collectively as the Koriki. The remainder occupy the area between there and Cape Possession in the east and are known collectively as the Elema. Eleman languages-here are eight of them-and Koriki are only very distantly related, if they are related at all. The pidgins that developed out of the contact between the Motu and their Koriki and Eleman trade partners died along with the hili following European contact and the introduction of Western foods and trade goods. Like the Mekeo trade languages discussed earlier, the Hiri trade languages, as their names indicate, were also pidgin languages. However, the Hiri trade languages were not AN-based pidgins and derived most of their structure from the Papuan languages in contact with Motu. They were no longer used following European contact. Among other Papuan pidgins, mention needs to be made of the Hauna trade language. Documentation on the Hauna trade language can be found in Conrad-Lewis (1988) and ConradMinch (1989). This trade pidgin developed between the Sepik Iwam-speaking village of Hauna and the Walio-speaking village of Wasiak located in the upper Middle Sepik region of the East Sepik Province of Papua New Guinea. Walio men from Wasiak visited Hauna where they exchanged sago, canoe logs, breadfruit, and fish for woven grass baskets and mats provided by their trading partners at Hauna. Knowledge and use of the pidgin is not confined to men alone as ConradMinch (1989: 7) state that some women also have a command of the pidgin. Some of the Paispeakers living at Pai also learned it. Genetically, Sepik Iwam belongs to the Iwam family of the Upper Sepik stock while Walio and Pai both belong to the Leonard Schultze stocklfamily (see Conrad-Lewis 1988).

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

Structurally, the Hauna trade language is a simplified variety of Sepik Iwam with grammatical and lexical input from Walio. Roughly 40% of the lexicon of the pidgin is derived from Walio as are three important grammatical morphemes: a topic suffix, deictic 'this' , and a negative particle. One of the earliest pidgins commented on, but never analysed in detail, is Iatmul Jargon. Mead (1938) first reported the use of simplified latmul throughout the Middle Sepik region of Papua New Guinea. Williams conducted salvage work in 1989, although no remaining speakers of the jargon were found among the latmul villages visited. A Yimas man, however, did have scanty knowledge of a jargon once used by the Yimas for trade with the latmul. latmul is a member of the Ndu language family and has about 10,000 speakers (Foley 1986a: 242). There are two dialects of latmul: Nyaura and Palimbei. latmul served as a lingua franca throughout the Sepik region, although no major studies have been conducted which investigate possible simplification or pidginization of the language by any other groups. In research conducted by Bateson in 1929, it was discovered that in trade between the Torembi-speakers and latmul-speakers from the village of Yantchanmangua on the Sepik River, the latmul language used in exchanges was brief and relatively fixed in structural terms. It is possible that Bateson's field notes, presently housed in the Library of Congress, may also contain information about this variety since he states in his (1932: 245) general ethnographic account: A great deal of time was devoted to language; but I only succeeded in speaking a kind of jargon, by means of which much of my information was collected. Most of my material is, however, in the form of dictated texts which even now I can only partially translate. In these texts phrases of jargon are mixed with correct latmul syntax.

421

All of this information indicates that the latmul 5 had a foreigner talk register; whether or not this variety was a pidgin remains to be decided. Equally poorly documented is the ManambuKwoma pidgin. Harrison (1987) reports that a 'trade-jargon' developed between the Manambu and the Kwoma on the middle Sepik River. The Manambu provided fish, coconuts, pottery, and shell valuables in exchange for sago given by the K woma. Harrison (1987: 505) states that the development of the pidgin reflects the cultural parity of the two groups, being roughly equal in population, military strength, and cultural influences on each other. In the other cases of trade relations involving the Manambu, it is the supposedly inferior group that learns the Manambu language. With these groups the Manambu occupy a superior cultural status. Harrison (1987: 505) does not describe the structure of the pidgin except to say that it is "lexically an amalgam of both languages". That stable contact languages can arise out of longer distance relations is illustrated by the Arafundi-Enga pidgin. The Maramuni Enga, a Highland group, are known to have travelled as well as traded in the traditional territories of the Yimas and Arafundi. Haberland (1966) states that some Arafundi groups travelled to the Maramuni Valley in Enga territory for hunting. He goes on to say that the Enga traded for tobacco with the Arafundi, while not being specific about which Arafundi villages were involved in the trade. William's recent fieldwork with Arafundi villagers gives a clearer picture of the trading situation and the development of the Arafundi-Enga pidgin. Maramuni Enga travelled as far as the Arafundi-speaking villages of Pundugum and Tungum in the East Sepik Province of Papua New Guinea. 6 The Maramuni brought tobacco and string bags to exchange for lime, betel nut, and kina shells provided by the Arafundi. Some of these items had been received from the Yimas via other Arafundi-speakers living at Imboin. This trading network created a cultural link between the Lowland Sepik cultures and the Highlands cultures.

422

P. Miihlhtiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

The Arafundi-Enga pidgin is simplified Enga with significant lexical input from Arafundi. Some structural features cannot be derived from either language. Both Arafundi and Enga are suffixing languages. Enga belongs to the Engan family and the dialects of Enga proper may turn out to be separate languages upon closer investigation. Arafundi is not related to Enga although both languages show typical Highland Papuan language features. A last possible candidate for a Papuan pidgin is Alamblak-Arafundi pidgin which today is a moribund variety. Williams' consultants in Yimas stated that a pidgin was once used between the Alamblak-speaking village of Chimbut and the Arafundi-speaking village of Auwim. We do not have any information regarding the goods that were traded, nor do we know whether or not this pidgin was in any way structured on pidginized Yimas. 3.4.5. Mixed languages of the central south-east mainland, Papua New Guinea It has been a theme of this text that different regions would appear to prefer different solutions to the problem of intercultural communication. In contrast to the high incidence of pidgins among the languages of the Sepik area, the central-southeast mainland of New Guinea is an area of linguistic mixing and convergence, probably brought about by endemic multilingualism. (See also Dutton's Atlas text Languages in contact in Central and South-east Mainland Papua New Guinea.) Take, for example, the coastal area around Table and Amazon Bays approximately halfway between Port Moresby and Milne Bay. Here remnants of four separate AN languages are to be found scattered throughout an area occupied by languages belonging to the NAN Mailuan language family. These languages are Magori, Ouma, Yoba and Bina (Dutton 1976). Of these the last three were virtually extinct when first 'discovered' twenty years ago. At that time there were only four living speakers of Ouma, two of Yoba and Bina. At the same time Magori was

spoken by just over 160 villagers living in the two villages of Magori (124) and Deba (39). All of these remnants show the effects of intimate contact with surrounding Mailuan languages. Magori in particular contains so much basic vocabulary in common with Magi, the largest and closest to it of the Mailuan languages, that for many years it was thought to be an aberrant form of Magi. Magi likewise shows the effects of contact with AN languages and Magori in particular. Indeed about 20% of Magi vocabulary is AN or probably AN in origin. A detailed analysis of the borrowed vocabulary in Magi and Magori suggests (Dutton 1982) that there has been a marked reversal in the social relationships between earlier speakers of these two languages. In particular, it suggests that the long-distance coastal trading system operated by the Magi from Mailu Island at the time of European contact, was not developed by them, but was probably physically taken over from the Magori. What particular circumstances could have led to this outcome it is not possible to say. However, judging by what was happening in the Port Moresby area at the time of European contact, where Austronesians and non-Austronesians were in close contact and participated in long-distance trading, a likely picture emerges. This is that the Austronesians, being sailors and traders, were gradually joined by their NAN 'friends', who learned the skills of their AN neighbours, until they eventually became confident and strong enough to take over the trading system and associated technology, and to develop it to the position of eminence that it was at the time of first contact. A more extreme case is that of Maisin on the mainland opposite to Magori. Here the contact between what was originally an AN language, and some NAN language or languages has resulted in such heavy borrowing and linguistic interference that linguists have long debated whether it was originally AN or NAN. Although it has now been fairly conclusively demontrated that it was originally an AN language, closely related to those of the immediate area (Lynch 1977; Ross 1984, 1988) it has not been possible as yet to identify

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

the Papuan language or languages with which speakers of Maisin were in contact prehistorically. Maisin thus represents a more extreme case of language mixing than does Magori. As such it probably reflects a quite different social situation obtaining prehistorically between the speakers of the languages involved. In particular it probably reflects the result of a power shift prehistorically between two populations (as in the Magori case) in which AN speakers were suddenly cut off from a Papuan population or populations whose language (or languages) they were in the process of learning. As a result they were forced to use an incompletely learned Papuan language as their mother tongue (in contrast to Magori). At the other end of the spectrum are the AN Motu and the NAN Koiarian languages of Koita and Koiari, spoken around Port Moresby. As indicated by some borrowings these languages have been in contact for a long time (Dutton 1989). However, in contrast to Magori and Maisin, the borrowing has been mainly lexical and of a cultural kind suggesting less intimate contact. This is even though, at the time of European contact, many Koita lived in or very close to Motu villages and some Koita participated in longdistance coastal trading with the Motu. 3.4.6. The situation in West Irian (Irian Jaya) Relatively little is known about contact languages of the Indonesian western half of New Guinea. 7 It is likely that more targeted research will lead to the discovery of many such languages. Some cases are mentioned below: Pidgins and trade languages in Fakfak and the Onin peninsula (a) There have been two main languages used for communication across ethnic lines in the Onin peninsula, one Austronesian and the other nonAustronesian. Onin, originally spoken on the north-west coast of the peninSUla, has come to be the trade language often spoken by speakers of Sekar, Erokwanas, Bedoanas, Arguni, Uruangnirin (all Austronesian), Iha, Baham and Karas (non-Austronesian). It is used along the coast, and is often understood passively, but not actively

423

spoken. Its use as a second language is greatest around the north coast east of its homeland, in the vicinity of Kokas, where the great number of indigenous languages has led to the need for a common language in the form of a simplified Onin. Along the south coast its strongest use is in areas contiguous to the settlements of On in speakers, to the east of Fakfak. The origin of On in itself is said to be in a mixture of the Kei languages and Iha (Coenen 1954), but short of positing massive and regular relexification along the lines of the other Austronesian languages of the area, this origin appears unlikely. (b) Iha The second trade language used in the area, Iha, is spoken in a simplified version and is understood passively to some degree by the Austronesian speakers around Kokas Bay; but it is the area around Fakfak that sees Austronesian speakers actively learning a simplified, trade version of Iha. This trade Iha diverges from the original language in having no trace of the complicated tense system that is present in Iha, all verbs taking the irrealis inflection, and not using the accusative set of pronouns, with the unmarked set being used instead. The word order, however, remains SOV. Baham and Karas speakers, already speaking closely related non-Austronesian lan-guages of their own, learn the language more fully, and when speaking Iha do employ the full range of tenses. (c) The Tor trade language

In the Tor River region on the north coast of Irian Jaya, east of Sarmi, the Berik language was used by speakers of the other related Tor languages, as a trade language when two groups met. It was still a viable trade language in 1961 when Oosterwal did his fieldwork (see OosterwaI1961). (d) Pidgin Ekari

A pidgin version of the language of the Ekari Wissel Lakes area is reported to have been in use to facilitate trade along the trade routes, running down to the coast from the Enarotali area (Voorhoeve, personal communication).

424

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, J. Williams, S. A. Wurm

(e) Trade Biak

The Biak language is used as a trade language over much of Cenderawasih (formerly Geelvink) Bay, as well as along the north coast of the Bird's Head and into eastern Maluku, on the islands of Waigeo and Misool (see van Hasselt 1936). For further information on pidgin and trade languages in Irian Jaya see the text Some trade languages of insular South-East Asia and Irian Jaya by Mark Donohue in this Atlas. 3.4.7. Reef Santa Cruz languages On the main island of Santa Cruz, the two languages Santa Cruz and Nanggu are located. The former consists of two sub-languages, Londiii and South-western Santa Cruz, so that it may be possible to suggest the presence of three languages on the island (Wurm 1981 a). On the Reef Islands to the north-east of Santa Cruz, a single language, Aiwo, is spoken. Together, these languages constitute a family, the Reef-Santa Cruz (RSC) family, containing the Aiwo (or Reef Islands) and Santa Cruz sub-families (Wurm 1981a). Codrington (1885) gave some very brief notes on Aiwo and a now extinct dialect of LOdiii, and regarded them as constituting very aberrant "Melanesian"-he existence of Papuan languages was not yet known then. When Wurm started superficial work on Aiwo in the mid-fifties, he took the same view (Wurm 1957). However, when he started carrying out more detailed work in all the languages of the family in the late sixties, he came to the conclusion that the languages were originally Papuan, but had been very heavily affected and altered as a result of overwhelming Austronesian influence in the partial takeover of an Austronesian language, or languages, by the speakers of originally Papuan languages (Wurm 1969, 1976, 1978, 1981a, 1987, 1992). It is of interest that the Austronesian elements in these languages belong to a wide range of differing Austronesian language groups: Polynesian, southeastern Solomonic and northern New Hebridean, with an element encountered in New Caledonia and the southern New Hebrides, as well as elements from far to the west (Wurm 1970).

Lincoln (1978) holds a different view and regards the languages as originally Austronesian. He plays down the possibility of Papuan influence upon them and attempts to explain, through Austronesian alone, the presence of features and elements which the present writers regard as Papuan (Lincoln, personal communication). That the languages of this area exhibit a significant degree of mixing is not in dispute. Equally undisputed is that Austronesian influence involved a number of languages rather than a single one and that it occurred at different points in time and possibly in different locations. We are thus concerned with consecutive mixing between two full systems rather than with creolisation involving three or more systems at a single point in time (for a discussion of this distinction see Markey 1979). Without the present writers wishing to commit themselves to a final answer, they would like to present some of the data pertinent to the discussion of this and many similar problems. Languages such as those of the Reef Santa Cruz family, confirm that lexical evidence on its own is not a reliable guide to genetic affiliation, especially in instances where borrowing is institutionalized for taboo or other social reasons. However, it may well be that a closer study of the nature of lexical mixing may give clues to the direction of borrowing. The observations below, have been made on the lexicon of these languages. (l) The proportion of lexical items of ProtoOceanic or Proto-Austronesian origin is greater in all Reef Santa Cruz languages than the proportion which is definitely not Austronesian (see Wurm 1970: 487ff.). (2) There appear to be no 'whole classes of morphemes that bear no resemblance to equivalent classes in Oceanic languages' (Lincoln 1978: 961) except for one set of subject-marking suffixes. (3) One can identify some formal correspondences with other Papuan languages, such as those of Rossel Island and Bougainville. (4) The fact that mixing occurs right in the lexical core suggests very close contacts. Note, however, that since these contacts occurred over a prolonged period of time, the number of

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

subjectively foreign words (i.e. to the speakers of RSC languages) must have been much lower than is suggested by a static lexical count. (5) The sound changes required to reconstruct Proto-Oceanic on the basis of present-day RSC data can be motivated for individual words or small groups of words only: 'Changes required for one comparison may be exactly opposed to the sound changes required for the next comparison' (Lincoln 1978: 961). How do such observations bear on the argument and what further research is needed to settle it? An important step yet to be taken is the reconstruction, using comparative as well as internal reconstruction, of a Proto Reef Santa Cruz lexicon. The aim of such a reconstruction would be to ascertain whether the Oceanic material in these languages is related in a more regular fashion than the alleged Papuan material, in which case an Oceanic origin of the lexicon would seem more likely. That lexical evidence is not necessarily supported by structural evidence is well known in pidgin and creole linguistics. A next step would be to use tests to determine the relative antiquity of lexical items such as those suggested by Heath (1978) and Miihlhtiusler (1985). Greater antiquity is signalled, among other things, by: (1) allomorphic specialization, excluding surface phonological conditioning; (2) greater susceptibility to grammatical rules. An illustration of these principles will be given using data from morphology. A final test for the lexicon would be to appeal to universal lexical hierarchies such as the implicational scales for numbers, colours or plants (see Brown 1977). Thus, the fact that the numbers 'two' and 'three' but not 'one' can be related to Oceanic languages supports the thesis that the most basic element is non-Oceanic. Obviously, one would not wish to pick on such isolated cases but develop criteria for distinguishing the degree of susceptibility to borrowing of different categories of words. The mix of Austronesian and non-Austronesian features can be illustrated with the example

425

of LOdtii. Non-Austronesian features in LOdtii include those set out below. (1) While Santa Cruzan lacks the gender system which is present in Aiwo, its noun-class system which is based more on the shape of objects than on their nature, is more elaborate than Aiwo. (2) Features in the numeral system above 5, which operates on a subtraction basis, are similar to features of the numeral system in the Papuan Buin language. (3) Suffixes appear in the verb phrase which denote that the action referred to by the verb phrase occupies a non-final position in a sequence of actions. (4) The negative is indicated with verbs through a prefix-suffix combination. The prefix is formally similar to an Austronesian negative particle, but is verbal in nature and can be inflected independently as a verb. Of the Austronesian features in L6dtii, the Austronesian forms (but NAN functions) of subject suffixes can be mentioned as well as the Austronesian forms of some other function morphemes in the verb and noun phrase. It should be noted that AN forms are often employed for quite different non-AN functions. There are cases such as -ti (V suffix indicating a light touch, nondamaging) and AN plurality, scattering. As in Aiwo, the markers of the L6dtii noun-class system, which is based more on the shape of objects than on their nature, are formally similar to the common Austronesian article n + V, though their functions are different. One can of course examine this and additional structural evidence and then opt for the conclusion that the Santa Cruz languages are either basically Austronesian or basically non-Austronesian. Such a solution is not essential if the research question is framed differently, for example, if it is assumed that the result of many language contacts is a new system, a chemical compound rather than a mechanical mixture. As the function of this atlas is to highlight research areas in need of further investigation rather than to present definitive answers, we shall leave this matter here, hoping that the situation in

426

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

the Santa Cruz islands will attract more languagecontact experts. 3.4.9. Dual-lingualism in the Solomon Islands The observation that pidgins typically reduce or prevent language mixing reminds us of the fact that intercultural communication and interlinguistic borrowing are separate parameters and need to be handled as such. Failure to recognise this could lead us into some of the fallacies that have characterized past arguments about the close relationship between population mixing and language mixing. Lincoln (1976 and elsewhere) produces important evidence on the nonparallelism in the two processes. In his (1976) paper on contact between the Austronesian language of Banoni and the Piva language in south west Bougainville, he investigates claims to the effect that "Piva is Papuanized Banoni" (in Oliver 1949) and comes up with a number of generalizations about the concept of Papuanization. He concludes that, in spite of intensive contacts between the speakers of these languages, mutual linguistic influence was very weak. Lincoln (1976: 99) explains this is as follows:

One possible explanation may be found in the interesting phenomenon of duallingualism. Dual-lingualism is the form of language contact in which a speaker of language A, living in close contact with a speaker of language B, understands language B, but does not speak B; furthermore, the speaker of B understands A, but does not speak A. Evelyn Todd (personal communication 1973) brought this possibility to my attention. Todd observed one Austronesian-speaking man from Guadalcanal living on Savo Island married to a speaker of the nonAustronesian Savosavo language. She spoke her language, he spoke his, and they learned to understand each other without speaking the other language. I observed the same kind of interaction between a Siwai man and his Banoni wife. He spoke non-

Austronesian Siwai and she spoke Banoni. They could understand each other but neither spoke the other's language. In this village all the children learned Banoni. Nearly all the women speak exclusively Banoni. The men usually can speak Banoni, Siwai, and Tok Pisin fluently. Many also know one or more other languages. The point is that the Banoni learn to speak or to understand Siwai to accommodate their relatives or affines who speak Siwai. The Siwai speakers can and do get by without learning to speak Banoni. They can avoid speaking an incorrect or pidginized form of Banoni. Such a form of Banoni could be rich in Papuanizations, but it is avoided. If all contact between Banoni and Piva communities and Papuan communities has been characterized by this asymmetrical pattern of language learning, it might account for the low level of Papuanization in these Austronesian languages. Phenomena such as the ones described by Lincoln are also encountered in other texts where the authors frequently employ the term 'passive bilingualism' . 3.5. Micronesia Micronesia is the label given to an area of 2,0003,000 islands to the north of the equator, most of them uninhabited and uninhabitable (only six out of the 350 islands of the Palau group are inhabited, for instance). Life on the low atolls of Micronesia is hazardous, the populations have been under constant attack from droughts and storms. Linguistically, a distinction is made between: (l) Nuclear Micronesian languages (Carolines, Marshalls and Gilberts), (2) the Polynesian outliers in the southern Carolines, and (3) Polynesian type languages of the Palau and Marianas, with other languages, such as Yapese, being difficult to classify. The difficulties of classification are compounded by difficulties of counting languages. Bender (1982: 46) states that

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

"there are between ten and twenty languages indigenous to the cultural-geographic area of Micronesia". Rehg and Bender (1991) distinguished 23 languages. From the above discussion it follows that the area of Micronesia was settled by representatives of diverse linguistic traditions at different times and that there must have been prehistoric language contacts as a result. Regarding the settlement history, Alkire (1977: 12) writes: In sum, then, it seems that migrants entered Micronesia from at least two different directions, first from the Philippines and Indonesia and later from eastern Melanesia. Descendants of those who entered from the east ultimately established communities throughout the Gilberts, Marshalls, eastern and central Carolines, and eventually occupied islands as far west as Sonsorol, Pulo Anna, Merir, and Tobi southwest of Palau (indeed, present day inhabitants of these islands claim descent from Ulithians). Descendants of those who entered from the west have a more limited distribution-Palau, Yap, and the Marianas-although it should certainly be remembered that canoes from outside Micronesia continued to arrive from time to time in much the same fashion as the original migrants. Further-more, as populations began to grow on individual Micronesian islands, internal movements and migrations increased. All of these movements, whether purposeful or accidental, involved small groups of people and therefore had little chance of significantly altering the already established communities numbering in the hundreds. Nevertheless, movements of this type did serve to diffuse ideas and material items from island to island throughout nearly the whole of Micronesia. The multiple settlement history is reflected in linguistically distinct language groups in the area.

427

However, more important for the purposes of this chapter is the fact that these contacts continued after settlement. There appear to have been differences in the needs for intercommunication between the inhabitants of the high islands (Guam, Truk, Ponape, Kusai), who were reasonably self-sufficient, and the inhabitants of the low lying atolls, who had very limited resources. As pointed out by Terrell (1986: 181): " ... people there maintain close ties, both social and economic, with their neighbours near and far so that they could seek help or refuge if need be, when these communities are battered by storms or wasted by drought." The linguistic consequence as explained by Alkire (1977: 14) was: "The languages with the widest distribution were those associated with coral island popUlations, that is central Carolines and Marshallese. Not only does this reflect perhaps a shorter period of separation, but also the intensive contact maintained between these islands of limited resources." This account seems somewhat relativized by the finding of Lewis (1972: 30ff), who provides evidence: (1) that the entire area of Micronesia was one of close contacts; and in particular (2) that prehistoric contacts between the Carolines and the Marshall Islands and the Marianas were common; (3) that there were regular trade contacts between the Polynesian outliers and the Carolines. In addition to voluntary, peaceful contacts, there were involuntary drift voyages and deliberate raids on other islands. Marek (1986: 253ff.) provides some interesting thoughts on the relationship between the constraints on sailing technology and language/dialect contacts. He suggests that: " ... people within a day's (24-hour) voyage of another island maintained patterns of social interaction with that island's inhabitants that resulted in maintenance of mutual linguistic intelligibility between the two populations." (Marek 1986: 253). Examples of this phenomenon, resulting in language chains, are the varieties spoken in Kiribati and the Marshall Islands. Next to such routine contacts one needs

428

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

to keep in mind that there were also numerous opportunities for less institutionalized contacts. The problems encountered by those who have tried to provide a neat classification of Micronesian languages may well be a result of prehistoric language contacts. The indeterminate status of the Yap language, in particular, alluded to by Bender (1982: 45) may have to do with the regular contacts between Yap and the Caroline Islands eastward, through annual tributary voyages. Alkire (1977: 51) comments: The expedition began in those islands most distant from Yap, with canoes from Namonuito, Pulap, and Pulusuk meeting at Puluwat. The representatives from these islands moved first to Satawal and then to Lamotrek, where a delegate from Elato was also waiting. When the enlarged fleet arrived at Woleai, representatives from this atoll and from Ifaluk, Eauripik, and Faraulep joined the expedition. The group left W oleai and stopped at Fais and at Mogmog island in Ulithi atoll, and finally arrived at Yap. At each major stop during the voyage the chief of the highest-ranking island was in charge of the whole fleet and since, in general, the rank of the outer islands increased as one approached Yap, the three most important leaders of the expedition were, successively, the paramount chief of Lamotrek, who passed control at Woleai to the chief of Olimara district of Wottagai island, and finally the chief of Mogmog, who dealt directly with the Yapese chief when the expedition arrived at Gatchepar. Past researchers have tended to grossly underestimate both the extent of contacts and the linguistic consequences. This is illustrated by the example of Marshallese and Mokilese: out of a total of 4,156 words, Rehg and Bender (1990: 126) were able to identify about 200 clear loanwords, which contrasts with the two loanwords earlier identified. They conclude (p. 24):

In reconstructing Proto-Micronesian, failure to take into account lexical transfer from Marshallese to Mokilese will result in erroneous reconstructions and may lead to spurious subgrouping hypotheses. In his important paper on 'Direct and Indirect Inheritance in Rotuman', Biggs writes (1965: 414-415): In general what we know of culture history in the Melanesian area suggests a complex rather than a simple linguistic history, involving a good deal of movement in certain maritime areas, and long continued contact among speakers of related languages ... It would be surprising indeed if such contacts did not have substantial effects upon the languages concerned, effects which could be vitally important to comparative work, and to our understanding of Pacific prehistory. While the cultural history of Micronesia is apparently not so complex as that of Melanesia, one must nevertheless bear in mind that the Micronesians, especially the atoll dwellers, were highly skilled sailors and navigators, and that lexical transfer is a possibility that must be recognized in the task of reconstructing the linguistic prehistory of these peoples. Ellis (1991) provides interesting, contemporary data on intelligibility among Micronesian languages. However, as his question concerns the use of written documents, rather than the communicative success in face-to-face interactions, his results are only of limited relevance to understanding language contacts in prehistorical days.

3.6. Madagascar The ancestors of the Malagasy people probably left Kalimantan (Indonesia) in the 5th century and settled the large island on the east coast of Africa.

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

Indonesia. There is good reason to pay more attention to non-linguistic evidence for continued contacts between Madagascar and Southeast Asia until the arrival of the Portuguese. This is an important point, because many Austronesianists take it for granted that MLG is a kind of fossil language which had never undergone any significant borrowing prior to its migra-tion, and which afterwards developed in complete isolation from other Austronesian languages. The data also demonstrate that there must have been contacts with South Sumatra.

Recent work by K.A. Adelaar (1989: 1-46) shows some of the linguistic and cultural implications. His findings are yet another argument against the view that isolation and independent development are the main characteristics of island languages. He comments (p. 35): Postmigratory Contacts. However, what the data (the inscriptions and loanwords) do demonstrate is that Malagasy remained in touch with Southeast Asia for a considerable time after their migration. This is shown by the fact that there are Malay (ML) loanwords which did not undergo the Bantu "substratum" influence (such as tongolany [s2.1.1], bodo, landaizana, and lindona [s2.1.2]). The continued (or renewed?) contacts covered a timespan long enough for a set of sound changes to have affected the Malagasy lexicon (the Bantu "substratum"). Since it is not known when the Bantu "substratum" was operative, there is no way of dating loanwords on the basis of whether or not they have undergone the Bantu influence. On the other hand, in view of the Arabic loanwords which entered Malagasy (MLG) via Malay, the postrnigratory contacts must have lasted till after the introduction of Islam to

429

4. Conclusions The main aim of this chapter has been to demonstrate the urgent need for linguists to understand the question of prehistorical contacts between Pacific populations. The Pacific Islands were, with very few exceptions (Atotearoa, Easter Island), not inhabitated by people that were isolated for any length of time. On the contrary, deliberate and accidental contacts were rife, and it seems likely that many linguistic consequences resulted from such contacts. This chapter is meant to be an invitation to follow up the many leads we have brought together here.

Notes 1.

Excluded from this list is Lusi, an AN language of West New Britain Province, which Thurston (1982) argues is a creole language (that is, a pidgin language that has become the native language of a group of speakers) that developed out of contact between an AN language and the NAN language Anem. However, as it is no longer possible to gather data in the putative pre-Lusi pidgin, it is not possible to discuss

2.

3.

it here. Further details are also found in Thurston (1987). Jeff Williams' research was funded by grants from the University of Sydney in 1988-1989 and 1989-1990. Funding was also generously provided by UNESCO through Dr T. Dutton of The Australian National University. There are some pidgins spoken in the region whose input languages are

430

4.

5.

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, 1. Williams, S. A. Wurm

Austronesian, or Austronesian and Papuan. The hili trade languages described by Dutton (1983) are an example of the latter. The Yimas origin myth states that several different groups amalgamated in the formation of the present-day Yimas aggregate. It is possible that Iatmul jargon was confined linguistically to Palimbei-speaking groups.

6.

7.

These villages no longer exist and the villagers who once lived there have now moved to Namata, closer to the border with the Enga Province. The information in this section was provided by Mark Donohue, research scholar, Department of Linguistics, RSPAS of the Australian National University, who also contributed a text to this atlas entitled Some trade languages of insular South-East Asia and Irian Jaya.

References Adelaar, K.A. 1989 "Malay influence on Malagasy: linguistic and cultural-historical implications", Oceanic Linguistics 28/1: 1-46. Alkire, William H. 1977 An introduction to the peoples and cultures of Micronesia. Cummings Publishing Company. Bateson, Gregory 1932 "Social structure of the Iatmul people of the Sepik River", Oceania 2: 245-453. Bellwood, P.S. 1980 "The peopling of the Pacific", Scientific American. November, 138-147. Benedict, Paul K. 1966 "Austro-Thai: linguistic relations in Southeast Asia", Behavioural Science Notes 114: 227-261. 1972 "Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus", Studies in Chinese Linguistics II. Cambridge University Press. Bender, Byron W. 1982 "Micronesian Languages", in: l. Lynch (ed.), Readings in the comparative linguistics of Melanesia, 45-49. Port Moresby: University of Papua New Guinea. Biggs, Bruce 1965 "Direct and indirect inheritance in Rotuman", in: George B. Milner-Eugenie

l.A. Henderson (eds.), Indo-Pacific Linguistic Studies, Part I: Historical Linguistics, 383445. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co. 1980 "The position of East 'Uvean and Anuta in the Polynesian language family", Te Reo 23: 115-134. Blust, Robert 1987 "Rennell-Bellona /1/ and the "Hiti" Substratum", in: Laycock-Winter (eds.), 6979. Bopp, Franz 1840 "Uber die Verwandtschaft der malayisch polynesischen Sprachen mit den indischeuropaischen", Abhandlungen der Koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 5th Series, 27: 171-332. Brandstetter, Renward 1937 Die VerwandtschaJt des Indonesischen mit dem Indogermanischen. Lucerne: Haag. Brown, Cecil H. 1977 "Lexical universals and the human language faculty", in: Muriel Saville-Troike (ed.), Linguistics and Anthropology, 75-92. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Brunner, Linus 1982 Malayo-Polynesian vocabulary with Semitic and Indo-European roots. The Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

10.2. 130 pages. Previously published with Adele Schafer, 1976. Cain, Horst 1986 A lexican of foreign loan-words in the Samoan Language. Cologne: Bohlau Verlag. Capell, Arthur 1976 "Austronesian and Papuan 'mixed' languages: general remarks", in: Wurm (ed.), 1976: 527-579. Chowning, Ann 1986 "Refugees, traders and other wanderers: the linguistic effects of population mixing in Melanesia", in: Geraghty-CarringtonWurm (eds.), 407-434. Clark, Ross 1980 "East Polynesian borrowings in Pukapukan", Journal of the Polynesian Society 89: 259-265. 1986 "Linguistic con vergence in Central Vanuatu", in: Geraghty--Carrington-Wurm (eds.), 333-342. Codrington, Robert H. 1885 The Melanesian languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Coenen, J. 1954 Grammatical sketch of Shaudin (lha). Unpublished MS in possession of C.L. Voerhoeve. Cohen, Ed M.K. 1983 The Austronesian roots of Quechua. Unpublished MS. Conrad, Robert-Ron Lewis 1988 "Some language and sociolinguistic relationships in the Upper Sepik region of Papua New Guinea", Papers in New Guinea linguistics No.26. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-76: 243-273. Conrad, Robert-Andy Minch 1989 A stable pidgin in the Upper Middle Sepik region of Papua New Guinea. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Pidgins and Creoles in Melanesia. Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, June.

431

Dening, G.M. 1972 "The geographical knowledge of the Polynesians and the nature of inter-island contact", in: Golson (ed.), 102-163. Dutton, Tom 1976 "Magori and similar languages of southeast Papua", in: Wurm (ed.) 1976: 581-636. 1982 "Borrowing in Austronesian and nonAustronesian languages of coastal south-east mainland Papua New Guinea", in: Amran Halim-Lois Carrington-S.A. Wurm (eds.), Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, vol.1: Currents in Oceanic, 109-177. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-74. 1983 "Birds of a feather: a pair of rare pidgins from the Gulf of Papua", in Ellen WoolfordWilliam Washabaugh (eds.), The social context of creolization, 77-105. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers. 1985 Police Motu: iena sivarai (=its story). Port Moresby: The University of Papua New Guinea Press. 1989 Motu-Koiarian contact, Papua New Guinea. Paper prepared for the Austronesian Project symposium, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 30 August, 1989. To appear in Tom Dutton-Darrell Tryon (eds.), Language contact and change in the Austronesian world. Mouton de Gruyter. in press Language contact and change in Melanesia. Paper prepared for "The Austronesians in History: common origins and diverse transformations" conference, ANU, 12-14 November, 1990 and to appear in a volume being edited by Peter Bellwood. Dutton, Tom-Malcolm Ross 1992 "A note on Hees' 'Tolai-Nakanai' trade language", Language and linguistics in Melanesia 23: 198-204. Dye, T. S. 1980 "The linguistic position of Niuafo'ou"', Journal of the Polynesian Society 89/3: 349357.

432

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, J. Williams, S. Wurm

Oyen, Isidore 1965 A lexicostatistical classification of Austronesian Languages. Baltimore: Waverly Press. 1970 "Background 'noise' or 'evidence' in comparative linguistics: the case of the Austronesian Indo-European hypothesis", in: George Cardona et. al. (eds.), Indo-European and Indo-Europeans: 431-440. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Elbert, Samuel H. 1953 "Internal relationship of Polynesian languages", Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 9: 147-173. 1962 "Phonemic expansion in Rennellese", Journal of Polynesian Society 71: 25-31. Ellis, Jim 1991 Language Intelligibility Testing Across Micronesia. Paper presented at the 6th International conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Honolulu. Fischer, Steven R. 1991 Homogeneity in Old Rapanui. Paper presented at the 6th International conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Honolulu. Foley, William 1986a The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1986b Language change and language allegiance in the Sepik. The Australian National University, MS. 1988a "Language birth: the processes of pidginization and creolization", in: Frederick Newmeyer (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, vol. IV, 162-183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. in press Problems and prospects in the Arafundi language. The Australian National University, MS. Garanger, J. 1974 "La poterie Lapita et les Polynesiens", Journal des Oceanistes 30: 42-43. 1892 "Genealogies and historical notes from Rarotonga", Journal of the Polynesian Society 1: 20-29, 65-75.

Geraghty, Paul (n.d.) Fijian dialect diversity and foreigner talk: the evidence of pre-missionary manuscripts, MS: Suva. Geraghty, Paul-Lois Carrington-Stephen A. Wurm (eds.) 1986 Focal II: papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C94. Golson, Jack (ed.) 1972 Polynesian navigation. Auckland: Polynesian Society. Grace, George W. 1978 "Introduction" [to volume of papers from the Oceanic Comparative Linguistics project]. Working Papers in Linguistics 10(1): 1-7. University of Hawaii. 1981 "Indirect inheritance and the aberrant Melanesian languages", Studies in Pacific Languages and Cultures. Society of New Zealand. Groves, Terab'ata R.-Gordon W. GrovesRoderick Jacobs 1985 Kiribatese: an outline description. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, 0-64. Guiart, J. 1953 "Nouvelle-Caledonie et les Iles Loyalty", Journal de la Societi des Oceanistes 95: 93-97. Haberland, Eike 1966 "Zur Ethnographie der Alfendio-Region (Siidlicher Sepik-Oistrikt, N euguinea)", Jahrbuch des Museums fur Volkerkunde zu Leipzig 23: 33-67. Hale, Horatio 1846 United States Exploring Expedition, 1838-42: Ethnography and philology. Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard. Harding, Thomas G. 1967 Voyages of the Vitiaz Strait: a study of a New Guinea trade system. The American Ethnological Society, monographh 44. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

Harrison, Simon 1987 "Cultural efflorescence and political evolution on the Sepik River", American Ethnologist 14: 491-507. Heath, Jeffrey 1978 Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. Hees, Friedrich 1915-16 "Ein Beitrag aus den Sagen und Erzahlungen der Nakanai (Neupommern, Siidsee)", Anthropos 10-11: 34-64, 562-586, 861-888. Heider, Karl 1979 Grand Valley Dani: peaceful warriors. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hinloopen Labberton, D. van 1925 "The Oceanic languages and the Nipponese as branches of the Nippon-MalayPolynesian family of speech", Transactions; Series 2: 77-115. Asiatic Society of Japan. Hoenigswald, Henry M. 1971 "Language history and creole studies", in: Dell Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages, 473-480. London: Cambridge University Press. Hollyman, K. 1959 "Polynesian influence in New Caledonia", Journal of the Polynesian Society. 59: 356-89. 1962 "The Lizard and the Axe", Journal of the Polynesian Society. 7113: 310-27. Holm, John 1989 Pidgins and creoles, Vol. II. Cambridge University Press. Holzknecht, Suzanne 1989 The Markham languages of Papua New Guinea. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-115. Hovdhaugen, Even 1986 "The chronology of three Samoan sound changes", in: Gerraghty-Carrington-Wurm (eds.), 313-331. 1987 From the Land ofNafanua. Samoan oral texts in transcription with translation, notes and vocabulary. (=The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture,

433

Serie B: Skrifter LXXII). Oslo: Norwegian University Press. in press Language contact in the Pacific: Samoan Influence on Tokelauan. Hymes, Dell 1974 "Ways of speaking", in: Richard Bauman-J. Sherzer (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking, 433-451. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jones, Alan 1985 Two Mekeo Pidgins. Unpublished Ms., Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, Canberra. Josephson, Nors S. 1987 Greek linguistic elements in the Polynesian languages. Heidelberg, Germany: Winter. Kelley, David H. 1962 "Linguistics and problems of transpacific contacts", Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists 35, Vol. 1. Mexico, 17-19. Key, Mary R. 1980-1981 "South American relationships with North American Indian languages", Homenaje a Ambrosio Rabanales, Boletin de Filologia 31: 331-350. Santiago: Universidad de Chile. 1987 A world map of hypothesized language affiliations. University of California. Kramer, Augustin 1902 Die Samoa-Inseln I. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbartsche Verlagsbuchhandlung. 1903 Die Samoa-Inseln I. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbartsche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Kumitau, Vilisoni-Hekau Maihetoe 1982 "Origins of the Niue people", Niue, the history of the Island. pp.83-146. Landsberg, Marge E. 1986 Material for a bibliography of trans linguistics studies. Bloomington, Indiana. Langdon, Robert-Darrell Tryon 1983 The language of Easter Island. Hawaii: Institute of Polynesian Studies, Brigham Young University.

434

P. Milhlhausler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, J. Williams, S. A. Wurm

Lanyon-Orgill, Peter A. 1960 A dictionary of the Raluana language (New Britain, SW Pacific). Published by the author in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Laycock, Donald, C. 1973 "Sissano, Warapu, and Melanesian pidginization", Oceanic Linguistics 12: 245277. 1975 "More than half the world", Hemisphere 30-35. Laycock, Donald C.-Werner Winter (eds.) 1987 A world of language: papers presented to Professor S.A. Wurm on his 65th birthday. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-100. Lewis, David 1972 We, the navigators. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Lincoln, Peter C. 1976 "Banoni, Piva, and Papuanization", Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-45: 77-105. 1978 "Reef-Santa Cruz as Austronesian", in: Wurm-Carrington (eds.), 929-967. 1979-80 "Dual lingualism: passive bilingualism in action", Te Reo, 22/23: 65-72. Lithgow, David 1976 "Austronesian languages: Milne Bay and adjacent islands (Milne bay Province)", in: Wurm (ed.), 1976: 441-523. 1987 "Language change and relationships in Tubetube and adjacent languages", in: Laycock-Winter (eds.), 393-410. Lynch, J. 1977 Notes on Maisin-An Austronesian language of the Northern Province of Papua New Guinea? Paper presented to the Eleventh Annual Congress of the Linguistic Society of Papua New Guinea in Lae. Mimeographed. 1981 "Austronesian 'loanwords' in TransNew Guinea Phylum vocabulary", Papers in New Guinea linguistics No.21. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-61: 165-180. Macdonald, Donald 1907 The Oceanic languages: their grammatical structure, vocabulary, and origin. London: Henry Frawde.

Macgregor, Gordon 1937 Ethnology of Tokelau Islands. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 146. Honolulu. Marek, Jeffrey C. 1986 "Micronesian dialects and the overnight voyage", Journal of the Polynesian Society 95/2: 253-258. Markey, Thomas L. 1979 Diffusion, fusion and creolization. Unpublished Ms., Technical University of Berlin. Martin, John 1817 An account of the natives of the Tonga Islands. I-II. London: John Murray. Mayer, Raymond 1976 Les transformations de la tradition narrative aI 'fie Wallis (Uvea). Publications de la Societe des Oceanistes No.38. Paris: Musee de l'Homme. McEwen, J.M. 1970 Niue dictionary. Wellington: Department of Maori and Island Affairs. Mead, Margaret 1938 The Mountain Arapesh: an importing culture. American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers 36: 139-349. Milner, George 1957 "Mots et concepts etrangers dans la langue de Samoa", Journal de la Societe des Oceanistes 13(4): 51-68. 1963 "Notes on the comparison of the two languages (with and without a genetic hypothesis)", in: H.L.Shorto (ed.), Linguistic comparison in South Asia and the Pacific, 2844. London: School of Oriental and African Studies. 1966 Samoan Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press. Miihlhausler, Peter 1974 Pidginization and simplification of language. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, B-26. 1985 "Patterns of contact, mixture, creation and nativization: their contribution to a general theory of language", in: Charles-James N. Bailey-Roy Harris (eds.), Developmental mechanisms of language, 51-89. Pergamon Press.

Precolonial patterns o/intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

1987 "The identification of language mixing with special reference to the Reef-Santa Cruz situation", in: Laycock-Winter, (eds.), 481493. 1988 Intercultural communication in the Pacific area in precolonial days. Paper prepared for the Fifth International Conference in Austronesian Linguistics. Auckland. Oliver, Douglas C. 1949 "Studies in the Anthropology of Bougainville, Solomon Islands", in: Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archeology and Ethnology 29, Harvard University. Oosterwal, G. 1961 People of the Tor. Assen: Van Gorcum. Pawley, Andrew K. 1966 "Polynesian languages: a subgrouping based on shared innovations in morphology", Journal of the Polynesian Society 75: 39-64. 1967 "The relationships of Polynesian Outlier languages", Journal of the Polynesian Society 76: 259-296. Ranby, Peter 1982 "The dual reflexes of Proto-Polynesian *J: in Anuta", Te Reo 25: 3-11. Ray, Sidney H. 1911 "Comparative notes on Maisin and other languages of Eastern Papua", in: Journal of the Royal Anthropological Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 41: 397-405. Rehg, K.-B. Bender 1990 "Lexical transfer from Marshallese to Mokilese: a case of intra-Micronesian borrowing", Oceanic Linguistics. 2911: 1-26. Rensch, Karl H. 1987 "East Uvean, Nuclear Polynesian? Reflections on the methodological adequacy of the tree model in Polynesia", in: LaycockWinter (eds.), 565-581. Rhedin, Erik 1982 Basque-Ainu-Tarahamare. Unpublished MS. 1985 Indo-European and Finnish. Unpublished MS.

435

Rivet, Paul 1926 "Les Malayo-Polynesiens en Amerique", Journal de la Societe des Americanistes de Paris (N.S.)18: 141-278. Ross, Malcolm 1984 "Maisin: a preliminary sketch", Papers in Papua New Guinea Linguistics, No.23. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-69: 1-82. 1987 "A contact-induced morpho syntactic change in the Bel languages of Papua New Guinea", in: Laycock-Winter (eds.), 583601. 1988 Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of Western Melanesia. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-98. Saville-Troike, Muriel 1972 Linguistics and Anthropology. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Sorenson, John L. 1952 Evidences of culture contacts between Polynesia and the Americas in Precolumbian times. M. A. Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. Strong, Walter M. 1911 "The Maisin language", in: Journal of the Royal Anthropological Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 41: 381-396 Taylor, Andrew 1978 "Evidence of a pidgin Motu in the earliest written Motu materials", in: WurmCarrington (eds.), 1325-1350. Terrell, John 1986 Prehistory in the Pacific Islands. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press. Thurston, W.R. 1982 A comparative study of Anem and Lusi. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, B-83. 1987 Process of change in the languages of north-western New Britain. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics B-99. Todd, Evelyn M. 1975 "The Solomon language family", m: Wurm (ed.), 1975: 805-846. Tryon, Darrell T. 1979 "The language situation in the New Hebrides", in: Wurm (ed.), 1979a: 11-32.

436

P. Miihlhiiusler, T. Dutton, E. Hovdhaugen, J. Williams, S. A. Wurm

van Hasselt, FJ.F. 1936 "Het N oemfoorsch als een eenheidstaal op het N oordwestelijk deel van Nieuw Guinea", TijdschriJt Nieuw Guinea 1: 114117. Villalon, Maria Eugenia 1977 Paper submitted to Brent Berlin for an anthropology class, University of California, Berkeley, connecting Proto-Polynesian and Proto-Cariban. Williams, Jeffry P. 1989a. On the genesis of multiple Papuanbased pidgins in Yimas. Paper presented at The Second International Conference on Pidgins and Creoles in Melanesia. Port Moresby, PNG, June. 1989b Tanim tok: the varieties of pidginized Yimas. Papers presented at The Inaugural Meeting of the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, Washington, D.C., December. Wurm, Stephen A 1957 "Aberrant Melanesian in the Santa Cruz Islands, and the classification of Melanesian languages", in: Proceedings of the 9th Pacific Science Congress, November 18-30, Bangkok. 1969 "The linguistic situation in the Reef and Santa Cruz Islands", in: Papers in New Guinea linguistics No.1 O. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-21: 47-105. 1970 "Austronesian and the vocabulary of languages of the Reef and Santa Cruz Islands -a preliminary approach", in: WurmLaycock (eds.), 467-553. 1976 "The Reef Islands-Santa Cruz Family", in: Wurm (ed.), 1976: 637-674. 1978 "Reefs-Santa Cruz: Austronesian, but...!", in: Wurm-Carrington (eds.), 1978: 969-1010. 1981a Papuan languages of Oceania. Tiibingen: G. Narr. 1981 b "The possessive class systems in Aiwo, Reef Islands, Solomon Islands", in: Papers in New Guinea linguistics No.21. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, A-61: 181-209.

1981 c "Notes on nominal classification systems in Aiwo, Reef Islands, Solomon Islands", in: Andrew Gonzalez-David D. Thomas (eds.), Linguistics across continents, Festschrift in honor of Richard Pittman. Manila: The Summer Institute of Linguistics and Linguistic Society of the Philippines. 1987 "Semantics and world view in languages of the Santa Cruz Archipelago, Solomon Islands", in: R. Steele-To Treadgold (eds.), Language topics. Essays in honor of Michael Halliday, 439-451. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co. 1992 "Some features of the verb complex in North Santa Cruzan, Solomon Islands", in: Tom E. Dutton-Malcolm D. Ross-Darrell T. Tryon (eds.), The language game: papers in memory of Donald C. Laycock, 527-551. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-l1 O. Wurm, Stephen A.-D.C. Laycock-C.L. Voorhoeve-T.E. Dutton 1975 "Papuan linguistic prehistory, and past language migrations in the New Guinea area", in: Wurm (ed.), 1975: 935-960. Wurm, Stephen A (ed.) 1975 New Guinea area languages and language study, vol. 1: Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-38. 1976 New Guinea area languages and language study, vol.2: Austronesian languages. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C39. 1979a New Guinea and neighbouring areas: a sociolinguistic laboratory. The Hague: Mouton. 1979b Australian linguistic studies. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-54. Wurm, Stephen A-Donald C. Laycock (eds.) 1970 Pacific linguistic studies in honour of Arthur Capell. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-13. Wurm, Stephen A.-Lois Carrington (eds.) 1978 Second International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics: proceedings. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics, C-61.

Precolonial patterns o/intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands

437

Relevant maps Papuan-based pidgins of mainland Papua New Guinea. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm, Jeff Williams and Tom Dutton. Map 29. Spread of the Polynesian languages. Compiled by Darrell Tryon. Map 32. Prehistorical language contacts in Polynesia. Compiled by Darrell Tryon. Map 33.

Post-18th century language contacts in Polynesia. Compiled by Darrell Tryon. Map 34. Chinese Pidgin English in the 19th century. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 52. The impact of Pidgin Hawaiian on Eskimo and Chinook. Compiled by Emanuel J. Drechsel and Makua Kane, Kaunami. Map 126.

Post-contact pidgins, creoles, and Hngue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages Peter Miihlhausler, Tom E. Dutton, Darrell T. Tryon, Stephen A. Wurm Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction It has been a recurrent theme of this atlas, that contact between the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Hemisphere region and outside colonisers over the past 200 years has led to dramatic changes in the oral or linguistic ecology. These changes, generally speaking, have been in the direction of European modes of speaking, the most obvious examples being the widespread use of metropolitan languages and pidgins and creoles derived from them I-a theme portrayed on a number of maps, and in their relevant texts, in this atlas. There has been a second, much less welldocumented phenomenon, i.e. the development of non-traditional lingue franche and pidgins based on traditional languages of the area. The reasons why these languages have been neglected are simple.

1. With a few exceptions, the languages concerned are not spoken with or by Europeans. 2. Many of these languages are small in size and transitional. 3. They were spoken in the more remote areas of the Pacific Hemisphere, e.g. Pidgin Chukchi in north eastern Siberia. The few exceptions to this rule are languages that were elevated and promoted by colonial and postcolonial governments. A further reason why this phenomenon of post-contact indigenous languages has not received proper attention is ideological and tenninological. The term "indigenous pidgin" or "indigenous lingua franca" has tended to be applied indiscriminately to pre-contact modes of intercultural communication and others that were

directly or indirectly brought into being by colonial contacts. Moreover, there has been a tendency to call all non-European languages "traditional", a label that is rarely appropriate in the vastly changed linguistic ecology of the Pacific Hemisphere. It must also be emphasised that the knowledge of this group of languages is very patchy and uneven and that much work remains to be done, and that observation and classification will have to dominate this research area for some time to come. The inspection of the documents available to us suggest the following preliminary sub-classes of post-contact pidgins and lingue franche: unstable foreigner talk, versions of vernaculars used in contact with outsiders, 2. mixed European/indigenous jargons, 3 . police and military lingue franc he, 4. mission lingue franche, 5. lingue franche and koines of non-traditional settlements, 6. work-place languages in non-traditional industries, 7. cultivated national languages, 8. planned lingue franche, 9. introduced ships' crews languages and maritime languages, 10. extended pidgins serving in several functions such as Hiri Motu. 1.

Some of these types will be dealt with separately in this volume (particularly 4 and 5) and relatively little will be said about them here. 2. Foreigner talk As documented in detail by Dutton (1987), the first attempts at communication between

440

P. MUhlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

Europeans and indigenes were ad hoc sign languages or in his words (p. 163) "crude substitutes for a real human language". Characteristic of these early encounters is the misunderstanding, on both sides, of the cultural rather than natural basis of many forms of nonverbal behaviour. For example, it is not clear why there should be a natural base to green branches as a symbol of peaceful intentions and the failure to get the message across in the following example from Western Australia (Stirling 1833: 217) should not come as a surprise: After taking a little refreshment, we commenced our journey again, and in a little time met with a small party of natives; these are the first I have seen on this excursion. We get a green branch, (which is the emblem of peace), shouted, and made many signs, but all was unavailing; poor Mungo, I venture to say, was never in such a predicament in his life before; he shouted, and appeared to boil with rage, showed his spear and throwing stick, but when he found that all his bravado did not deter us, but that we still kept advancing, his courage forsook him, and the whole party took to their heels, and away they ran, hooting and muttering, yet apparently terrified beyond measure; and no wonder, for I suppose they had never seen an European before, much less a horse, with a man thereon. As they worship the sun, and probably other celestial bodies, they might think "the Gods had come down". In spite of the prevalence of sign languages in some parts of the Pacific Hemisphere and despite their use in traditional intercultural communication, they do not appear to have developed into more structured and permanent systems of nonverbal communication in post-contact days. A long tradition of dealing with speakers of other languages appears to have conditioned many Pacific Islanders to using a foreigner-talk version of their language with outsiders. No systematic comparison or exhaustive listing is available but

the practice appears to have been widespread. In Polynesia, we have the evidence from New Zealand, where Clark (1991: 10 1) reports a number of data from Maori. The few examples of phrases and sentences recorded in these early sources also show deviations from normal Maori syntax. Sometimes they are telegraphic juxtapositions, with no explicit connection between the elements: A popo ica 'tomorrow-fish' (Marion n.d.: 295). More clearly connected sentences sometimes have subject-first word order, where the normal Maori sentence is verb-first. One example is unusually well documented, since it relates to the death of Marion du Fresne: As I got nearer, I saw that he was crying as he said: Tacoury mate Marion, which meant "Tacoury has killed Marion". I did not understand what he was saying at first because I was persuaded that Mr Marion was on board the vessel, however he repeated the same words several times so that I thought that the chief was trying to warn me that Tacoury planned to kill Mr Marion (Marion n.d. 179) Note that the sentence was repeated several times, which makes it unlikely that it was misheard. Subject and object are indicated by position relative to the verb, as in French or English, rather than by case-marking prepositions as in Maori. The verb mate 'die, dead' is used as a transitive 'kill'; and the verb is unmarked for tense, aspect or mood, which makes it impossible, as the writer notes, to tell whether the speaker is reporting a past event or warning about a future one. A final pidgin feature found in these early European records of Maori is reduplication. The use of reduplicated forms in contact situations may arise from a universal tendency to repeat things for greater certainty or understanding (Ferguson-DeBose 1977: 106). While reduplication plays some part in Maori grammar, the European writers reduplicate forms which are not (or cannot be) reduplicated in Maori. Thus Maori paakee 'rough outer cloak', patu 'weapon' and

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

puu 'tube, gun' are found in Cook's journals as buggy-buggy, patoo-patoo, and poupou. Similarly in Hawaii, Roberts (1991: 3) reports the widespread use of a foreigner talk version of Hawaiian, during the first years of contact with Europeans:

'Some Hawaiians know very well how to speak correctly but through associating with foreigners, they act as though they hardly know the language'. Since most Hawaiians up until the end of the 1800s were unacquainted with English, communication between English-speakers and Hawaiians usually involved the use of PH (= Pidgin Hawaiian). The same use of foreigner talk is also reported for Melanesia, the best-known case being that of Motu. Dutton (1985: 36) comments: The first intimations that the Motu used some form of simplified language to communicate with foreigners appears in the experiences and records of the first Europeans to visit the Port Moresby area and to stay there for any length of time. The very first European in this category was the Rev W. G. Lawes who settled in Port Moresby in late 1874 as the first European missionary of the London Missionary Society. Upon arrival, Lawes immediately set about trying to learn Motu. It is reported that it was some time later that his son, Frank, who played with the boys in the village and learned Motu from them, drew his father's attention to the fact that he did not speak 'true' Motu but only a simplified version of it (Chatterton 1970: 96) which he also used in making his first translations into Motu. Gradually, although apparently not without some difficulty he learned it; if later informants are correct and dictionaries of it, one of which, the third edition of his grammar of Motu, contains some additional information about the nature and use of the

441

simplified version that he had first learnt. In particular, Lawes noted that there were a 'good many colloquialisms' or 'instances of pidgin Motuan' in use amongst the Motu which were 'not correct grammatically' but were 'sanctioned by usage'. Moreover, although they were used by the Motu 'in speaking to foreigners', the Motu would 'never do so amongst themselves'. Clark (1979: 26ff) cites a number of other examples from around the Pacific: There is some evidence that a pidginized or simplified form of the vernacular was used in these early contacts. At Nomuka (Tonga) in 1789, Bligh, who had visited the island 12 years earlier with Cook, at first found himself 'not sufficiently master of the language' to make enquiries for former acquaintances known in 1777 ... came on board ... Tepa having formerly been accustomed 'to our manner of speaking their language', I found that I could converse with him 'tolerably well'. (Blight 1792: 149). Apparent examples of pidginized vernacular can be found in early sources on Hawaiian (Campbell 1822: 185-6), Maori (Savage 1807; Nicholas 1817, passim) and Fijian (Dodge 1972: 184-5). The main pidgin-like characteristics of this material are the use of English word order, and the omission of most grammatical particles. There is also abnormally frequent reduplication, particularly in the Maori examples. A study of such foreigner talk registers is important for a number of reasons: 1. It can provide useful comparative material for claims as to the universality of foreigner talk constructions. 2. It can help assess linguists' accuracy in early reports on Pacific languages. That observers have taken foreigner talk for real language over long periods of time has been

442

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

confirmed with data from Samoa by Duranti (1981). An interesting example from Siberia is Chukchi Pidgin which developed from Chukchi foreigner talk in response to the imitation by Chukchi speakers of faulty Chukchi spoken by their non-Chukchi neighbours (see the Atlas texts by Maslova and Vakhtin The far north-east of Russia, and the two texts by S.A. Wurm, Indigenous lingue franche and bilingualism in Siberia, and Some linguefranche and Pidgins in North Siberian and North Pacific areas at the beginning of the 20th Century in this volume). This case shows that Bloomfield's (1969, originally 1933) characterization of pidgins as the target language speakers' imitations of the learners' errors needs to be taken more seriously than is currently the case. 3. Mixed European/Indigenous jargons The relative proportion of European and local content in the contact vernaculars in the Pacific can be taken as an index of changing power relations. The transition from predominantly local content to European content, in most cases, parallels the gradual increase in European power as can be illustrated with the case of Nyungar Pidgin English in Western Australia. Millet (1872: 84), for instance, complains that, around 1860 at York, east of Perth, he:

was obliged to content myself with the conventional jargon which is universally adopted in speaking to the nati ves by all who are not really conversant with their language. This sort of hotch-potch is composed of native words largely mingled with English, and is better understood by the natives than plain English. Some early examples of this mixed jargon are found in Collie (1834): The dark motives of my swarthy friends were unblushingly exposed, immediately the little boy turned to go to the house where he lived, "bicket" "Me wangka

(tell), Charlie Brown; top" (stop.) "Kai (yes), me wangker plenty;" "me very good. " By about 1890, indigenous words such as Wangka had been replaced by English ones (tellum), word order was SVO, the register was used pre verbally , rather than sentence initially, etc. In other words, during 60 years of contact between the Nyungar and the Europeans, the contact language gradually moved towards a simplified English. Similar cases are reported for many other places. Clark (1991: 103) reports that a lexicallymixed, macaronic EnglishlMaori contact jargon was used in New Zealand. The lexically mixed nature of the language described here is illustrated in the speech of "Toogee", as given by King: etiketica no eteka 'a chief never deceives'. The first and last words can be explained as Maori tiketike 'high, important' and teka 'lie, deceive' with agglu-tinated particles; but the negative can only be English. As with other short utterances in the literature, we are unsure here whether to classify this as pidgin English or pidgin Maori. Genuinely mixed lexicons appear to be largely restricted to the very first stages of contact between two partners, in particular situations where neither is socially dominant. In 1883, Schuchardt (1979 edn: 19) referred to trade languages on New Caledonia and other Pacific Islands consisting of 'a mixture of New Caledonia, Chinese, English, and French words, e.g.: tayos lookout belong faya 'friend, look out for the fire', bon jour, tayo 'good day, friend' and the Chinese Russian Pidgin of Manchuria consists of approximately two-thirds Russian and onethird Chinese lexical material. More recently, Clark (1979: 30ff.) presented a long list of examples from mixed jargons found in the Pacific in the early years of European contact. They include: Ah, karhowree sabbee lee-lee, ena avra tee maitai! 'Ah, the white man knows little, this ti-liquor is good!'

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

homi pickeninee wow 'Give the child a nail' Tungata tihi no good 'A thief is not good' me tickee tickee 'I saw it' etiketica no henerecka 'A chief never deceives' me, tamaree ... plenty kanaka Maritar 'When I was a boy, there were many people at Ma'atea'

One of the best-known albeit elusive varieties of this type is Hawaiian 'Hapahole', a term coined by Reinecke. A good discussion of the linguistic problems is found in Bickerton and Wilson (1987: 61-76) and in Robert's recent work (e.g. 1991). The term hapahaole has often been interpreted to mean a pidgin English with occasional Hawaiian words thrown in, but recent research by Drechsel and by Roberts suggest that one is dealing with a Pidgin Hawaiian. Roberts (1991: 3) comments: The next graduation of the continuum was Pidgin Hawaiian. Bickerton's original proposal that it superseded the use of 'hapa-haole' and was the primary basis of communication between natives and foreigners, receives strong support from observations made by English-speakers and Hawaiian-speakers throughout the nineteenth century. and Since most Hawaiians up until the end of the 1800s were unacquainted with English, communication between English-speakers and Hawaiians usually involved the use of Pidgin Hawaiian (PH). The evidence also supports Bickerton's claim that PH was the medium of

443

communication on the plantations throughout most of the nineteenth century. An analysis of Pidgin Hawaiian can be found in Bickerton-Wilson (1987: 63-64) e.g. for the following sentence: From the Hawaiian newspaper Ka Nupepa Ku'oko'a dated September 15, 1894, in which Hawaiian children in the village of Kawaihae trying to rent accommodations to Japanese immigrants are quoted as saying: Pidgin Hawaiian

Iapana, makana dala oe hiamoe ma keia hale wau Japan, gift money you sleep at this house I

Hawaiian

Eke Kepani, ina ha'awi mai 'oe i kala, Oh the Japanese, if give hither you CM money, e hiki ia 'oe hiamoe nrl keia hale o-'u TM can CM you TM sleep at this house of-me

English

'Japanese, if you give me money you can sleep at my house.'

The Pidgin Hawaiian example shows avoidance of grammatical items (except, again, one determiner, this time keia, and the locative particle ma) and adherence to SVO word order. Additional characteristics include lack of clause conjunction between makana dala and oe hiamoe, the substitution of a specialized vocabulary (makana 'gift, give a gift' for ha 'awi 'give'; Iapana 'Japan', for Kepani 'Japanese'), and substitution of the nominative pronoun form wau for the regular possessive.

444

P. Miihlhausler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

Hawaiian Pidgin was used widely on early whaling vessels 2 and its linguistic influence extended to two North American contact languages, Eskimo Jargon and Chinook Jargon (see Drechsel-Makua Kane 1982). 4. Police and military jargons/pidgins The history of the role of colonial police forces in the development of contact languages still remains to be written. It seems clear, however, that its role in the Pacific islands was somewhat less important than in Africa or colonial Asia. The problem of the pacification of the Pacific islands was of a lower order of magnitude than that encountered in the large land mass of Africa. The best documented police pidgin is Police Motu subsequently called Hiri Motu . Its history has been recorded in considerable detail by Dutton (1985). Its development as a police language is characterised by Dutton (pp. 69-71) as follows :

The way in which the Armed Native Constabulary was formed and developed has a number of implications for the history of Police Motu whose name is so closely associated with it. The most important of these are: 1. Because the founding members of the armed Native Constabulary were drawn from areas outside the Central Division of British New Guinea (notably from Fiji, the Solomon Islands, the Western and Eastern Divisions) and had not had contact with the Motu before coming to Port Moresby, they obviously did not know any Motu on arrival. Consequently, they must have been forced to communicate with one another and with their superiors in some form of English which the majority, if not everyone, knew, and this is presumably what MacGregor was referring to later (Annual Report 1892/3 : xxvii; 1893/4: xxx) when he noted that right from the start 'English' was one of the 'ordinary languages of the force'. But it is clear from

other sources that this 'English' was not regular English but some 'broken' or pidginized form of it. Subsequently, Administrators MacGregor (and later Murray) decided to try to improve this English and eventually to make 'proper' English the official language of the country: "It is of the first importance that this language should be taught generally. If one thinks of the great diversity of dialects spoken by the natives of this country, the necessity for a common language at once becomes apparent. It is quite clear that the common language should be English. That is the language used by the constabulary, by boatmen, prisoners, etc. under Government control. It is intimately connected with the future industrial development of the colony." (MacGregor, Despatch No. 13, 2nd February 1897 . To C .O . CO 422111/9329, frame 82). But it is clear that, even by 190617, the English of the force had not reached the desired level, because Acting Administrator Murray then threatened (Annual Report 190617: 21) that 'a regulation will probably be made under the new constabulary ordinance making promotion and increase in pay dependent in part on a knowledge of English' in an attempt 'to facilitate the spread of the English language among the policy.' What MacGregor (and Murray later) apparently failed to realise, however, was that 'broken' English (and what later became known as Police Motu) were learned and used because they were easy to learn and filled an important social role. It was not, as Murray later claimed in 1924: 10, just as easy for someone to learn proper English as some form of 'broken' or pidgin English. As proof of this, one has only to look at the way that Pidgin Englishes have spread in other parts of the South-west Pacific and how costly it has been to try to teach Papuans and New Guineans English over the past 30-40

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

years. What emerges from this and is therefore interesting for having never been admitted in the discussion of the history of Policy Motu before, is that 'Motu' was not the only language of the force. 'Broken' English was just as much one of its languages. Yet for certain social and historical reasons having to do with the administrative centre of British New Guinea being in the centre of a Motuspeaking area, Police Motu was emphasized as the language of the force. In fact, both languages were required as each was used in different parts of the country and a member of the force could be transferred from one part of the country to another on duty at any time. In the Port Moresby area little 'English' was known initially (as already indicated) and so one had to use 'Motu', and conversely, when one was in Eastern or Western Divisions, 'English' was broken. On the other hand, one could use 'English' in the Port Moresby area if one happened to meet someone who knew it and likewise (and increasingly) 'Motu' in the Eastern and Western Divisions. So the police were quite flexible and well adapted to the social scene - much more so, in fact, than their administrators were, and have generally been, ever since. But why did only Police Motu become associated with the force (as the name indicates) and what was this language like? To answer these questions, let us return to the second main implication of the way the force was formed, mentioned above. 2. Because the force was formed in the way it was and was housed and trained in the Port Moresby area, and because the language situation in that area was the way is was (viz. that Motu was the most widely known language while at the same time very little 'English' was known), the police could not avoid learning some kind of Motu if they were to carry out their duties in the Port Moresby area. Thus, it will be

445

remembered that the initial nucleus of the force consisted of imported Fijian and Solomon Islanders and that Papuan members were only added 'gradually' (to use MacGregor's words). When these imported men arrived they would have immediately recognized a number of what would today be called wantoks in Papua New Guinea (or persons from the same area and/or cultural background) amongst the foreigner population of Port Moresby. As these wantoks had been in Port Moresby for some time, could speak 'Motu' and were living in Motu villages, it is presumed they would have very soon introduced their newly arrived 'friends' into the Port Moresby scene, in particular to its local politics and the utility and necessity of knowing 'Motu' for survival purposes in the Port Moresby area. Even if this had not taken place, the new arrivals would surely have quickly come to the same conclusion themselves for they were very soon put to work after their arrival in the Rigo and Mekeo areas. Here they would have been working with Government officials and 'servants' some of whom were the wantoks already referred to and all of whom (e.g. the Hunter and Belford brothers, Jack Tanna, the Lifus, and others) spoke 'Motu'. Consequently, they would have been exposed to 'Motu' before being put to use in the field. Subsequent to its development, Police Motu spread to outlying government stations and assumed additional communicative functions. More on this language will be given later in this text. Remarks on the role of the police force, its development and spread of Pidgin Fijian are found in the Atlas text on this language (Pidgin Fijian and Pidgin Hindustani in Fiji by Jeff Siegel, in this volume). Dutton's investigation demonstrates that the consideration of the police force in the development of Pacific pidgins can be a very rewarding enterprise. It is hoped that further studies will be undertaken.

446

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

A much less well known Police Pidgin, according to Jeff Williams is Dani "Police Talk" in Irian Jaya. Heider (1979: 11) makes reference to a simplified variety of Dani that he was taught by his consultants in his early stages of fieldwork. According to Heider, the verbal morphology was greatly reduced comprising only the present imperative form. This pidgin appears to have its origins in Dutch colonial contact with the Dani people, specifically in pacification. Geographically, Dani or Grand Valley Dani, is spoken in the Balim River Valley region in the central highlands of Irian J aya. There are approximately 75,000 speakers of Grand Valley Dani. More information on the Dani language is given by Rule (1977). 5. Mission lingue franche in the Pacific area proper The history of these languages, because of their large number and widespread use, is dealt with in separate texts in this volume (Mission and church languages in Papua New Guinea by Malcolm Ross; Mission and church languages in Island Melanesia by Darrell Tryon; Philippines: Mission and religious languages by Andrew Gonzalez; Languages used in the domain of religion in Indonesia by Chuck E. Grimes).

6. Lingue franche of non-traditional settlements in the Pacific area proper As police and mission languages typically involved deliberate policies and language planning, the development of lingue franche in the non-traditional settlements of the Pacific area is by and large a spontaneous process. Again, like police languages, it is one that is very poorly documented. Non-traditional settlements fall into a number of different categories:

1. Mixed beach communities dominated by speakers of English and other Metropolitan languages. In these communities, the use of a pidgin or creole derived from the Metropolitan language tends to be the norm. (See the Atlas

texts on English-derived contact languages in the Nineteenth Century and those on French and Spanish in the Pacific). 2. Government stations and towns mainly inhabited by indigenous people who communicated via a creolised variety of a regional European pidgin such as Honiara in the Solomon Islands: Solomon Pijin, Lae (Papua New Guinea): Tok Pis in, Hoskins (New Britain): Tok Pisin, Thursday Islands (Torres Straight): Broken, Vila (Vanuatu): Bislama, Zambuanga (Philippines), Zambuangefio. In a number of non-traditional settlements, an indigenous language has become the principal language for the multi -lingual indigenous popu1ation. This has occurred, for instance in Fakfak (West Irian) in the vicinity of this town (and possibly other areas as well). There is a prepidgin version of Tukang Besi spoken, by people who are not yet at the pidgin level but have learnt a few words. The words first learned are typically the numbers, directions, and words associated with trade-mohali 'expensive', leama 'good', haul 'buy', sawi 'travel', etc. This pre-pidgin is in use by the mini-bus drivers that ply the streets, and some mountain people who come down to the coast to sell firewood. The role of Tukang Besi in other parts of the Indonesian archipelago, has been described elsewhere in this volume (Some trade languages of insular South-East Asia and Irian Jaya by Mark Donohue). Many cases have been documented for Australia where it is a common phenomenon, possibly because of the close link between language use and location in Aboriginal language ideology. A more detailed account is given in a separate text Koines and indigenous lingue franche in Australia by Peter Miihlhausler and Rob Amery. This phenomenon of koines has been characterised by Siegel (1985b: 375-76) as follows: Koine-isation is the process which leads to mixing of linguistic subsystems, that is, of

Post-contact pidgins. creoles and lingue franche. based on non-European and indigenous languages

language varieties which either are mutually intelligible or share the same genetically related superposed language. It occurs in the context of increased interaction or integration among the speakers of these varieties. A koine is the stabilized composite variety which results from this process. Formally, a koine is characterized by a mixture of features from the contributing varieties, and at an early stage of development, it is often reduced or simplified in comparison to any of these varieties. Functionally, a koine serves as a lingua franca among speakers of the different varieties. It also may become the primary language of amalgamated communities of these speakers. In the Pacific koine-isation is closely associated with migration. The best documented koine is the one of Fiji Fijian Hindustani (Siegel 1975). It is known to about 350,000 Indians, or 49% of the population of Fiji. The term Hindustani is used to refer to the koine-ised lingua franca employed by speakers of a long chain of dialects of Hindi in India. As Barz and Siegel have shown, it developed into a number of overseas varieties as a consequence of the employment of Indian workers in many parts of the British Empire. The variety that emerged in Fiji is characterised by Barz and Siegel (1988: 122-123) as follows: Fiji Hindustani (FH), or Fiji Hindi, is the mother tongue of virtually all of the descendants of indentured labourers from India who make up nearly half of Fiji's population of 700,000. The language has been described in some detail by several authors (Siegel 1972, 1975, 1977; Pillai 1975; Moag 1977; Tiwari 1979). These studies show that the morphology of FH appears to be derived from several different Indian Hindi dialects, but is less complex in comparison. The lexicon is characterized by a large number of items which are typical of the eastern dialects of Hindi (from eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar),

447

and also by many loanwords from both English and Fijian. Among Fiji Indians, as among speakers of other varieties of Overseas Hindi (OH), their own language has very little status. Constantly measuring it against Indian standards, they call FH tuta bhasa 'broken language', while they call Standard Hindi (SH) such bhasa 'pure language'. In the past there has been a clear example of diglossia (Ferguson 1959) within the Fiji Indian speech community with SH used in formal domains, such as education, newspapers, letter writing, public speaking and broadcasting, and FH used only in informal domains (Siegel 1972: 13-14, 1975: 129). In recent years, however, many of the formal domains have been increasingly taken over by English (Siegel 1973). But unlike other varieties of OH, FH remains firmly entrenched in the informal domains and there is no sign as yet that it will follow other varieties towards extinction. The present-day structure of Fijian Hindi is the result of a complex arrangement of developmental forces. Among the first generation of workers, both Hindi dialects and a Pidgin Hindustani was used and considerable variation existed. This was followed by a narrowing of variety and the focussing on a new separate norm by the first generation of native speakers: With regard to Fiji Hindustani, it appears that stabilization came along with nativization. Historical evidence shows that a recognizable distinct immigrant koine with large-scale borrowing from English and Fijian emerged as a recognizable overseas variety along with the first generation of Fiji-born Indians. First of all, according to informants, Fiji Hindustani originated only after children were born in Fiji. For example, one informant said that children born in Fiji spoke their own language, different from those spoken by their

448

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

which currently differentiate the different dialects, and by the influence of Fijian, especially in phonology. It is generally less complex than any of the North Malaitan (NM) dialects, resulting in some constructions which are ungrammatical according to NM speakers.

parents. Another called Fiji Hindustani tarka wala bhasa 'children's language' and said it was a 'mixed dialect'. (Barz-Siegel 1988: 128). Another settlement koine spoken in Fiji is Wai (Siegel 1986). This language developed in the small settlements near urban areas where Solomon and other Pacific Island workers, often with Fijian wives, moved to after the termination of their employment on the Fijian plantations. Siegel (l986a: 439) writes:

As Siegel further points out (1986a: 456), Wai is not a fully developed koine: Wai developed under some of the social conditions in which koine-isation typically takes place, and its linguistic features of formal simplicity and mixture are also typical of koines. But the variation among Wai speakers indicated that in general it did not get past the pre-koine stage of development. Certain areas of Wai grammar, however, such as the independent pronoun system, do show that at least some stabilisation had taken place. If the Kai Solomons had not adopted the Fijian language and culture, Wai might have been further stabilised and developed into a nativised koine, like the Fiji Hindustani of the Fijian Indians.

According to the 1976 census, there were 6,822 "Other Pacific Islanders" in Fiji. In addition to the descendants of those who came as indentured labourers, these include free immigrants and their descendants from Tonga, Samoa, Kiribati, Tuvalu and other islands. Nearly all the descendants of the labourers, however, are part Fijian, and many were probably included in the census with Fijians. Kuva (1974: 19) gives the number of "Solomons" or Kai Solomone-as all descendants of Melanesian labourers are known in Fiji as 8,000. The linguistic nature of Wai is characterised by Siegel (l986a: 455) as follows: On the basis of preliminary data, it is difficult to ascribe Wai to anyone North Malaitan dialect. It appears to be characterised by a mixture of lexical forms

Apart from their importance as social phenomena, the study of languages such as Wai can be of considerable importance to linguistic theory, for instance, in naturalness hierarchies in language. An example is afforded by Siegel's data on Wai pronouns (l986a: 453):

Lau

To'abaita

Baelelea

Baegn

Fataleka

Wai

Is 2s 3s

nau 'oe

nau 'oe

nau 'oe

nau 'oe'

nau 'oe

nau oe

nia

nia

nia

nia

nia

nia

lID3 lIT liP

goro golu gin

koro kulu Ida

koro kolu

koro kolu Ida

koro kulu Ida

koro kolu Ida

Post-contact pidgins. creoles and lingue franche. based on non-European and indigenous languages

449

Continued from page 448 1XD 1XT 1XP

gemere gemelu gami

kamare'a kamili'a kami

kamere kameli

kamiri kamelulkameli kani

karo kalu kani

2D 2f

kamoro'a gomoro kamulu'a gomolo kamululkamolu kamu gamu

kamoro kamulu

kamuru kamolu

kamoro kamulu

kamu

kamu

keroa

kerua

keroa

kerua

kera

kera

kera

kera

2P

3D 3T

3P

daro dalu gera

kero'a kilu'a kera

The data would seem to lend support to claims made by Miihlhausler and Harre (1990) that the first person plural inclusive pronoun is considerably more natural than the first person exclusive and that furthermore, plural tends to be more marked in languages that distinguish numbers as singular, dual, trial, paucal, plural and other numbers. Again the French possessions in the Pacific are another area where the development of koines can be observed. Best-known is the situation in Tahiti where dialectal Tahitian, much influenced by immigrants from outlying island groups and Chinese settlers is employed in the larger settlements. Lavondes (1971: 1112) reports: Among the urban middle class, this Chinese influence is blamed for the present alternation of the Tahitian language. Research would be necessary to determine whether this argument has any foundation in fact or merely reflects anti-Chinese prejUdices. It is also very possible that the knowledge of Chinese, particularly written Chinese, is dying out among the younger generation. This may be inferred from the 1962 census data for the proportion of persons of both sexes who 'read and write Chinese' is 61 % for the Chinese population aged fifteen and over, only 47% for those between the ages of fifteen and twenty. It should be mentioned, however,

kamelu

kamoro

that some data indicate that there is a tendency to use spoken and written Chinese in business where it would aid in insuring secrecy. The following update on the Tahitian as used by the Chinese in Tahiti, referred to as Te Parau Tinito or Chinese Pidgin Tahitian is based on research by Darrell Tryon. The Chinese came to Tahiti originally as manpower for the plantations, the first wave arriving in 1865-66. A second wave, which was much larger, came to Tahiti over a period of several years, from 1909-1928. (Moench 1963: 17-26). The Chinese of Tahiti came from the Kwangtung Province. 80-90% speak Hakka, a southern Chinese language. The remainder of the Chinese population are Cantonese, who called themselves 'Punti' (meaning 'native'). In 1983, there were 6,804 ethnic Chinese and 6,667 DemiChinese in French Polynesia (Census 1983). The demands of commerce make it necessary for Chinese businessmen in rural areas to be able to communicate in both Tahitian and Chinese, and in Papeete to be able to communicate in French as well. So it was that kind a of Pidgin Tahitian, known as Parau Tinito (literally 'Chinese speech') developed as a language of commerce used between the Chinese storekeepers and their Polynesian customers. This language is heard less

450

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

and less nowadays as French has become the most common cross-cultural medium of communication. Parau Tinito is characterised by its very largely Tahitian lexicon associated with a simplified and modified morpho-syntax, from which the standard Tahitian models are largely absent. In the past, the use of Parau Tinito among the influential Demi-Chinese middle class has been blamed for the impoverishment of Tahitian perceived in urban areas of French Polynesia. The beginnings of a koine-isation on a more modest scale appear to take place in New Caledonia among migrants from Wallis and Futuna. (4,500 islanders live in Wallis, and 2,500 live in Futuna, against 11,000 in New Caledonia. Wallisian and Futuna are related languages with a degree of mutual intelligibility.) Wallisian enjoys considerably more prestige and a variety of this language, with some admixture from French and other koine characteristics is spoken in the New Caledonian community of Wallis and Futuna Islanders. The structure and lexical changes of this variety remain to be documented. In many instances the separation between mission lingua franca and lingua franca of non-traditional settlements or koines cannot be made, mainly because missionisation in most multi-lingual areas tends to lead to contact between groups that were traditionally not communicating. We would like to illustrate with two examples from the New Guinea area, how missions practice and koine formation go hand in hand. More detailed studies are found in Wurm (ed.) 1977 and in the Atlas texts on the development of mission lingue franche (see above in 5.).

Case J-Suau Long before the arrival of the first Europeans in Eastern Papua, a simplified form of Suau was already in use as a trade language, however in spite of its prestige and widespread geographical spread, it was the more elaborate native vemacular of Suau Island that was chosen by the first missionaries as the basis of Bible translation and

mission work. The immediate consequence was the widening of the area of currency of this Suau and an increase of non-native speakers among teachers, Malayan teachers, English missionaries and indigenes from adjacent areas that used Suau as the principal, rather than merely a trade language. The inevitable structural simplification which characterises such social use of a language can be observed in Suau as well. Abel (1977: 981) observes: A language that is widely used beyond its natural boundaries is bound to undergo changes through the introduction of new words, or by investing old words with new meanings. But it also undergoes inevitable mutilation and change by its use as a second language. This results in a certain loss of clarity of expression and some confusion in the original idiom. The Suau language has suffered in this respect, and this has come about as a result of careless usage by some early teachers and missionaries. It has suffered even more because, as a second language, it has been passed on by non-Suau to other non-Suau.

Case 2-TolailKuanua Like Suau, Kuanua had some importance as a regional lingua franca before the arrival of the first Europeans though Mosel (1982) warns against regarding it as a proper lingua franca. Its main spread is due to three factors which took place after initial contacts with outsiders. 1. The adoption of Tolai as a mission language for New Britain, the Duke of York islands and New Ireland. 2. The establishment of Rabaul as the capital of New Guinea and the use of Tolai by some administrators and judges. 3. The influx of workers and settlers from many parts of New Guinea and adjacent Pacific countries into Rabaul and the consequent need for having a means of communication among the non-traditional urban dwellers.

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

Mosel (1982: 171) reports that: These experiences show that the dialect of the Kokopo Coast is on its way to becoming the standard variety of Tolai and that the Methodist Mission constitutes an important factor in this development, though there might be political reasons as well. This standard Tolai appears to be lexically and grammatically somewhat simpler than traditional Tolai, though the full extent of the institutionalization of the structural changes accompanying this partial koine-isation remains to be established as does the effect of the use of Tolai in radio broadcasts. Case 3-Micronesian One of the few examples of a new koine or pidgin outside Melanesia has been documented by Fischer (1979) for Ponape. Of the 12,000 inhabitants of this Micronesian island, about 3,000 are recent immigrants from various islands around Truk and Ponape whose ancestral language is not Ponapean. Most of them live around the capital, Kolonia. Fischer (1979: 89-90) remarks that speakers of traditional Ponapean look down on the variety spoken by those immigrants which he characterises as follows:

While individuals born and raised on Ponape generally speak fluent and grammatical, if not always elegant, Ponapean regardless of their ancestral origin, there have been, for perhaps a half a century or more, enough immigrants and long term visitors speaking a variety of other languages in the Kolonia and Sokas areas, so that a very restricted form of pidgin Ponapean has developed with limited vocabulary and simplified morphology (e.g. one form of the personal pronouns, the absolute form, is used in place of all other forms: verbal subject, object suffix and possessive suffix and classifier). A few Ponapeans use this type of speech in

451

talking to foreigners with imperfect knowledge of the language. I suspect that there may be some similarities of this pidgin Ponapean with baby talk, although it is not ideal, and this is a subject deserving further study. Many immigrants gradually approach standard Ponapean, as they remain on the island, but there are a number (perhaps largely those coming as mature adults) who seem to have stabilized their Ponapean at a pidgin level. Whether these individual varieties will be replaced by a stable socially sanctioned urban creole remains to be seen. There have been a number of major population shifts in Micronesia this century, including the movement of Southwest Islanders to Palau, the relocation of the Bikin islanders, and the relocation of the Ocean Islanders to Rambi. The history of these is documented in Lieber (1977) but its linguistic effects remain under-researched. As population movements and urbanisation progress, and as new intercultural contacts come into being, many more urban koines are likely to develop in places such as Honolulu, Los Angeles, Auckland or Noumea. Many of those will be socially marginal and transitional, nevertheless, their existence is likely to pose problems to social planners and educators and should be of considerable interest to sociolinguists too. The time has come for sociolinguists to undertake a more systematic study of this phenomenon. Whereas settlement koines are the result of permanent migrations, the next category of contact language is associated mainly with temporary migrant labour. 7. Workplace languages in non-traditional industries As already pointed out in the Atlas texts of contact languages derived from English and other European languages, the Pacific in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century was characterised by large-scale labour movements involving a number

452

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D.T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

of industries. In chronological order, excluding the maritime industries, these were: Sandalwood Beche-de-mer Sugar, coconut and other plantations Mines Farms and ranches Fish-processing plants In most instances, the non-local workforce, typically men in their twenties and thirties, was linguistically so mixed that no indigenous language prevailed, and that consequently a European-derived pidgin became the language of intercommunication. There are however, a number of important exceptions, some welldocumented, others yet to be investigated. Both the sandalwood and beche-de-mer industries involved a significant amount of vertical (low to high) communication, which tends to be detrimental to the development of a stable contact language. Siegel (1986) reports that in Fiji parties involved communicated via foreigner talk Fijian whilst jargon English tended to be used elsewhere. The plantations, on the other hand, favoured horizontal communication between equals of diverse linguistic backgrounds. The stable pidgins that developed were mainly English-based (in Samoa, New Caledonia and Queensland) but in Fiji, a stable plantation pidgin Fijian developed which is discussed in the Atlas text on PidginFijian and Pidgin Hindustani in Fiji by Jeff Siegel. This Pidgin Fijian appears to be different from the earlier Fijian-Tongan contact language. A significant number of South Sea Islanders mainly from the Gilbert and Ellis Islands, were employed in central America, particularly the Guatamalan coffee plantations. It is not known whether a simplified Gilbertese, a pidgin Spanish, or another language was current there, nor do we know whether Gilbertese served as a plantation language in the Samoan plantation industry. Research carried out into the history of contact languages in Hawaii (e.g. Day 1987, Bickerton-

Wilson 1987, Roberts 1991 and Roberts forthcoming) suggests that relatively developed pidgin Hawaiian was used widely in the nineteenth century in a number of settings. These included the plantations, where it was gradually replaced by a English-based pidgin, and the ranches. Bickerton-Wilson (1987: 68, 69) report: It is known that Hawaiian continued to be used as the work language (and even the language of command) into the 1930s in the only European-introduced, laborintensive, and paternal-type enterprise in Hawaii-the ranch. Ranches in Hawaii have typically had predominantly Hawaiian work forces, although they have long included employees and owners of different linguistic backgrounds. On the Parker Ranch, Hawaiian was in general use until the early 1950s. On Ni'ihau Ranch, the only place where Hawaiians of all age groups maintain primary fluency in Hawaiian, there were Hawaiian-speaking immigrant employees as late as the 1940s. Since the ranch and the plantation in Hawaii are organized along the same lines, and often have the same owners, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the linguistic situation on ranches in the 1930s resembled that of plantations at an earlier period, especially when we take into account the demographic balance of that period. Grammatically, and lexically, Bickerton and Wilson have identified a number of pidgin Hawaiian properties typical of pidgin languages including: (1987: 65) (a)

Subjects invariably preceded instead of followed verbs. (b) Articles were replaced by the demonstrative kela (Hwn. Kela 'that', distant from both speaker and addressee). (c) Pronoun forms were invariant across all cases.

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

(d) Grammatical items (markers of case, tense, and aspect, particles of direction, location, number, etc.) were omitted, save for an occasional preposition. (e) Sentences were generally restricted to single clauses. (f) A specialized vocabulary differing from that of Hawaiian was used: 1. Words modified by reduplication (hanahana 'work', Hwn. hana 'do'; nuinui 'great, many, bit' from nui (same meaning). 2. Word modified by shifts and/or expansions in meaning (makana 'give', Hwn. makana 'gift, give a gift'; aikane 'friend', Hwn. aikane 'very best friend'; pimai 'come', Hwn. pi'i mai 'climb hither'). 3. Words modified by addition or subtraction or morphemes (makule 'old', Hwn. elemakule 'old man'; mahea 'where', Hwn. mahea 'at where' (cf. no hea 'from where', i hea 'to where'). 4. Words of foreign (especially English) origin (kaukau 'food, eat';pihi 'fish'; sabe 'know'). It is hoped that more details will soon become known of this important Pacific pidgin language. A reduced form of Gilbertese is also said to have been employed in the guano mining on Nauru and Ocean Islands, though no hard evidence is available. Nothing is known about the language used in the Peruvian mining industry, where thousands of South Sea Islanders were deported, nor do we know what working language was used by the mixed workforce employed in the French controlled mines of Makatea. In recent years, fish-processing plants have been set up in a number of areas in the Pacific, employing sizeable numbers of both local and migrant labour (Korean, Filipino and Japanese). In the Solomon Islands there exists an incipient pidgin used between Solomon Islanders and Japanese fishermen working at the Solomon Taiyo fisher-canning factory situated at Noro Sound on the island of New Georgia. This pidgin was first reported to Tryon when he was

453

undertaking fieldwork into the vernacular languages of the Solomons in the New Georgia area in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Noro Pidgin is also spoken by the Japanese (Okinawan) fishermen and the people of the Munda area of New Georgia, for the fishermen sometimes come to Munda for rest and recreation. Noro Pidgin appears to contain a mixture of Japanese and English lexicon, with basically the same morpho-syntax as Solomons Pijin. Yet the lexicon and some of the expressions appear unique in the Pacific. Thus, for example: Em i Santa Maria 3s-PM-Santa Maria 'He died.' Menimeni ame much-rain 'It is raining hard.' This language is in need of urgent research, and indeed such research should be quite feasible given that the fishing company is still operational. It might be worthwhile investigating whether the Noro Pidgin has gained any currency with other Asian nations engaged in commercial fishing in the Solomons, and also perhaps in Vanuatu to the south. If this is not the case, the lingue franche used between Asian and Melanesian fishermen in island Melanesia should be investigated. 8. Cultivated national languages One of the most dramatic changes in the linguistic ecology of the Pacific has been the imposition of colonial boundaries-cutting across traditional communication networks, and the development of states and nations. The idea that a single language should be spoken by the population of a welldefined area was not one that was of great importance in the Pacific before the arrival of Europeans. Large populations speaking a single language were found only in Polynesia, particularly Hawaii and New Zealand (Aotearoa). However, it is symptomatic of the status of Pacific languages in the colonial era that after

454

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

initial attempts to develop Maori and Hawaiian for modem communication, they were replaced by English. Few attempts were made in the colonial period to develop an indigenous language into a language of administration or even a national language, though languages such as Malay were the de facto language of countries such as Dutch East India. Serious planning of national languages only occurred after independence. The best known examples of such non-traditional national lingue franche are Bahasa Indonesia, Pilipino, and the official use of Mandarin in countries such as Singapore, Taiwan, and most recently, Hong Kong and Macau and the elevation of the indigenous languages of the French Pacific, an example being the transformation of Tahitian.

Tahitian as a linguafranca Tahitian is the native language of the Society Islands in French Polynesia which has a population of 188,814 (Census 1988). It is also spoken as a first language in the north-western region of the Tuamotu archipelago. However, it is much more widely spoken and understood than this statement would indicate as it is the prestige language of this part of the Pacific. Tahitian is a required language for government employees in French Polynesia, along with French. For this reason, it is widely spoken and understood in the Marquesas Islands, in the Tuamotus, in the Gambier archipelago and in the Austral Islands to the south of Tahiti. It is also spoken and understood to a slightly lesser extent in the Cook Islands adjoining French Polynesia. It is spoken and understood too on Easter Island. Apart from the requirement of passing a test in Tahitian in order to be eligible to apply for employment with the administration of French Polynesia, it is learned by the thousands of Marquesans, Tuamotuans, Austral Islanders and Mangarevans who flock to Papeete in search of paid employment and the bright lights of the capital. In terms of comprehension and mastery of Tahitian by non-mother tongue Polynesians living in French Polynesia, there is a difference between Protestants and Catholics in that in the Marquesas

at least Protestants understand Tahitian better than Catholics because of their exposure to it during church services, while the Catholics use a Marquesan liturgy. On the other hand, the Bible in Tahitian is a major force in expanding the understanding and general mastery of that language in the Austral group. Another factor aiding the spread of Tahitian throughout French Polynesia is its daily use in television news programs beamed to the outlying islands by satellite. For those not able to watch television, there is an important radio program in Tahitian, broadcast for two years in the early evening every day. In addition, Tahitian is now officially taught in primary schools and in some secondary schools, which means that non-mother tongue Tahitians also learn Tahitian in a school situation. The survey of language use in French Polynesia conducted by Schooling in 1981 concludes that while there is very high degree of comprehension of Tahitian in French Polynesia, many Marquesans, Tuamotuans and the inhabitants of the two smaller archipelagos have difficulty in speaking Tahitian. Many of these people speak an imperfect or reduced form of the language. Indeed, the reduced or simplified forms of the language observed vary with individual speakers, reflecting their competence or lack of competence. While Tahitian is doubtless a vehicle of linguistic imperialism in French Polynesia, the other vernacular languages (Tuamotu an, Marquesan, Mangarevan and Rapan) are still very strong and used as the vehicle of primary communication throughout their home areas. While the local vernaculars are still the first language which children learn, it seems that they will be hard-pressed to resist the advance of Tahitian as modem communication favours the implantation of a monoculture.

9. Planned linguefranche The communication problems experienced by the European colonisers of highly multilingual areas such as Melanesia were widely debated in the first part of the colonial era. However, the solutions to

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

the problems were usually seen in imposing introduced metropolitan languages. An alternative solution, the development of a vulgar Papuan, an artificial language, combining grammar and lexicon from several Papuan languages, as the lingua franca of German New Guinea was deliberated for some time before it was dropped around the tum of the century. In view of the fact that many ex-patriots resented the use of their own language by the "natives", it seems likely that similar proposals were also deliberated in other colonies. This possibility remains to be investigated, however. 10. Ships' crews and maritime languages Much lip-service has been paid to the role of maritime trade and maritime industries in the development of pidgins and creoles in general, and in the Pacific, pidgins and creoles in particular, though remarkably little serious research has been done in this area. Consequently, only preliminary suggestions can be made here. 1. It is a known fact that a large number of Pacific islanders were employed as ships' crew in the early years of European explora-tion and colonisation. 2. We know from anecdotal evidence that pidginised versions of Pacific languages were employed on the board of ships and in several islands. Hawaii was a major focus for the Pacific whaling industry (see Bickerton and Wilson 1987: 62), as well as an important link between North American and Asia. Drechsel-Makua Kane (1982: 464-5) report what follows on the social-historical context of this language. Before long, the Hawaiian Islands became a base for commercial operation in the northern Pacific because of their strategic location in the trade between Asia and America, including Alaska. Commerce depended mainly on three commodities: furs,

455

sandalwood, and whale oil, of which only the second item was produced locally. The early commerce was dominated by furs traded from the Northwest Coast of North America via the Hawaiian Islands to China. By 1820, whaling made its appearance, and until 1830 the three branches of trade co-existed in varying proportions only to become diversified and eventually to include various agricultural products, especially sugar. In the trade of furs and other goods with the Northwest Coast of North America, in the Bering Sea, and in the Arctic Ocean: among the sailors recruited for whaling were a considerable number of native Hawaiians. During the three years from 1845 to 1847, nearly 2,000 Hawaiian seamen were reported to have served on foreign ships, most of them undoubtedly whalers. Similarly, during the 1850s, an average number of 400-500 Hawaiians per year enlisted as seamen. Moreover, about 100 Hawaiians were reportedly employed as labourers at Fort Vancouver in Oregon, the headquarters of the Hudson's Bay Company, before the middle of the century. The kanakas were appreciated as excellent swimmers, and probably as skilful canoemen as well, and did such menial tasks as those of trapper, domestic servant, shepherd, watchman, and sawmill laborer. It is precisely the sociohistorical setting of the fur and general trade between the Hawaiian Islands and the Northwest Coast of North America, and of whaling off the northern Pacific and Arctic Coasts, through which Hawaiian loanwords must have entered Chinook Jargon and Eskimo Jargon. This conclusion chronologically fits the first attestations of such Hawaiian loanwords, of which the earliest are dated to the middle nineteenth century in the case of Chinook Jargon, and to the late nineteenth century in the case of Eskimo Jargon.

456

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

The information given by Drechsel-Makua Kane (1982) suggests not only that a Hawaiian pidgin was in use over large areas of the Pacific but also that it influenced and was influenced by other contact languages such as Eskimo pidgin and Chinook jargon. It would seem likely that largescale employment of Loyalty Islanders, or Gilbertese and Tahitians in the whaling industry could have given rise to similar contact languages. The use of Tahitian in the whaling industry derives from a number of considerations. The first whaler in the Pacific was the Amelia, owned by Enderby and Sons of London. In 1789, her crewmember Archaelus Hammond was the first European to kill a sperm whale in the waters of the Pacific. After she returned to Nantucket with a cargo of whale oil in 1790, there was a rush to the Pacific from France, England and America and the whaling industry was well and truly launched in the Pacific. The most favoured whaling ports were the Bay of Islands in New Zealand, and Lahaina and Honolulu in the Hawaiian Islands. In between there were a number of other popular ports: Nuku Hiva in the Marquesas, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji and especially Papeete in Tahiti. In terms of whaling grounds, certain areas were found to be better than others. So for instance the Onshore Grounds off the western coast of South America led to the Offshore Grounds beyond the Galapagos Islands. Most favoured grounds were to be found in the Marquesas Islands, the Society Islands, Fiji, New Caledonia, western Melanesia and the Gilbert Islands, today known as Kiribati. Papeete, while never rivalling either the Bay of Islands (NZ) or Lahaina or Honolulu (Hawaii), was nevertheless one of the most popular ports of rest and recreation for whalers in the Central Pacific. There the boats' crews desported themselves in a manner which was the despair of the resident missionaries, for while a number of the whalers' captains were of exemplary behaviour, many of their crewmen behaved in a vile and uncontrolled manner, drinking and womanising.

In terms of numbers of whalers in Tahiti, there was a steady flow. In 1847, for instance, nineteen whalers called at Papeete. Of these one was French and one was English, but seventeen, totalling 5,695 tons and carrying 435 men, were American. The following year there were two French, one Brazilian and eleven Americans. In 1852, twenty-three whalers totalling 9,469 tons, in 558 days of fishing in the Tahiti area, captured whales yielding 24,150 barrels of oil. Less than a decade later, the American Civil War took its toll and the days of the great American whalers were over. Most of the whalers.then had full crews of Europeans, mostly from the east coast of America. However, the whalers contributed their fair share to the beachcomber population of Tahiti. Many a sailor jumped ship and settled down either for a time or permanently on Tahiti. This constant trickle of deserters often left the whalers shorthanded. So to fill up the numbers, captains often engaged Polynesians in considerable numbers. In 1825 the Nantucket Inquirer stated that 'about fifty of the natives of Otaheite are employed in whale-ships belonging to that port, some of whom are in Nantucket'. Only a minority, however, ever saw New England. When the ship was full of oil and ready to head for home, the Polynesians were simply put ashore at the nearest island. So it was that while a good number of Tahitians were employed in the whaling industry in the Central Pacific, they were in the minority in terms of total numbers. It is not really surprising then, that no Pidgin Tahitian developed in the industry, but rather a kind of maritime jargon, which was principally English-based in terms of lexicon, although with an admixture of Tahitian elements, the precursor of what was to be spoken on Pitcairn in later years. Some examples of this jargon, recorded by the famous deserter Herman Melville, in Omoo (1842) will service to make the point:

"Ah, Ideea, Mickonaree oee?" (Oh, Idea, are you a Christian?)

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

"Yes, me mickonaree, mickonaree ena" (Yes, I'm a Christian, a Christian here [pointing to her mouth])

Yet again, he gives the following account of a missionary's sermon in the Papara church on Tahiti: Good friends, I glad to see you; and I very well like to have some talk with you today. Good friends, very bad time in Tahiti; it makes me weep. Pomare is gone-the island no more yours, but the Wee-Wee's. Wicked priests here too; and wicked idols in women's clothes and brass chains. Good friends, you no speak, or look at them .... I speak more by by. Good friends, little to eat left at my house. Schooner from Sydney no bring bag of flour; and kanaka no bring pig and fruit enough. Mickonaree do great deal for kanaka; kanaka do little for mickonaree ..... 11. Extended pidgins and creoles 11.1. General characterization The term extended pidgin refers to pidgins which over time have come to approach the functional range and structural complexity of full first languages. Once a significant number of speakers uses them as first language they are called creoles. Whereas a number of pidgins of the so called "European-based" type have become considerably expanded (Tok Pisin and Bislama being examples), not many non-European based ones have attained this status. This, no doubt, reflects their inferior social status vis-a-vis the powerful metropolitan languages. There are well known exceptions throughout the third world, Sango in the Central African Republic and Swahili in Tanzania being particularly well known examples. In general, Samarin's statements (1989: 697) "the lingua franc as of Africa have not been used as they ought to be in the study of colonialism", also goes for the Pacific Hemisphere. The raise of Malay from a trade pidgin to a national language (documented in the Atlas text by Charles (Chuck)

457

1. Grimes, Indonesian-the official language of a multilingual nation, in this volume) is an exception, as is Hiri Motu whose development has been researched in depth by Dutton (e.g. 1985). In this section, we shall focus on Hiri Motu's development as well as that of the much less well known Tetun of East Timor. 11.2. Hiri Motu The expansion of Hiri Motu (both in a geographical and in a structural sense) can be traced to the impact of World War II. In pre-war years, we were dealing with a hierarchically structured colonial society in which Policy Motu was an important instrument of social control, though hardly one of social advancement. As Dutton (1986: 380) has pointed out:

The war had a very significant impact on Papuans and on their lingua franca Police Motu. Because of the large numbers of Papuans involved as labourers in the war effort and because of the language policies and practices adopted by the allied forces, Police Motu was given a significant boost in status: It had been formally recognised as an important language whose use had been actively encouraged by powerful bosses. It had been described and recorded and it had been used in broad-casting for the first time. But the language itself does not appear to have been affected much by this change except that many new Englishderived war-related vocabulary items were added to its lexical store. Once the war was over the country gradually returned to normal although there was no going back to the taim bipo, to the conditions of the 'good old days' before the war. Australia accepted that it had neglected its duty towards the country and its people and now determined that everything possible would be done to develop it. From now on both territories would be administered as one and education would be promoted as the key to success. Not surprisingly, English was

458

P. Milhlhausler, TE. Dutton, D.T Tryon, S.A. Wurm

reaffinned the official language and universalliteracy in English set as the ultimate goal . Official thinking at the time did not consider Police Motu capable of fulfilling a fonnal educational role. The language was, after all, a 'pidgin language', not a 'pure' one, and could not possibly be called on to fulfill any but a supplementary role, even though it was already known by a large percentage of the population and were easily learned by others. That does not mean that the population generally despised Police Motu in particular or held it in low esteem or that the language had lost ground suddenly. Not at all! It was simply that it was nonnal at that time for administrators not to consider pidgin languages when planning programmes of education. In point of fact, Police Motu was called on to playa very important role in post-war development, as it was utilized to fill the informal educational gap that could not, and would not, be filled by 'proper' English for a long time. Not only the District Officers, Assistant District Officers and Patrol Officers needed it now, but as the administration expanded, the new Agricultural officers, the new Co-operative officers and others who were coming into the Territory in increasing numbers needed it too. As a result, the language was given new life as it expanded into new areas. It was no longer the language of the police and district administrators, but the unofficial language of administration par excellence. This not only led to an increase in lexical and structured complexity, it also motivated those having to use the language to address the problem of description and standardization. Thus in the earliest and best known of these accounts (Chatterton 1946, 1950), an attempt was made to tidy up the language and to create an improved version which "while maintaining a reasonable measure of simplicity" avoids "unnecessary barbarities" (Chatterton

1950: 5). This tendency to try and upgrade the language by ('pure') Motu-ising it was bound up with European notions of correctness as well as with their negative attitudes towards pidgin languages in general at the time. In Police Motu's case, the language was constantly compared to 'pure', or (as Sir Hubert Murray, the first and longest serving Lieutenant Governor of Papua, insisted on calling it) 'classical' Motu, and its 'barbarities' emphasised. A standardardised version of Police Motu was used in a series of elementary primers commissioned by the Department of Education. Their author, Chatterton observed (p.c. 1985) that: These little books probably did more for the status of the language at that time than any other single event. On the one hand they not only manifested a growing interest in the language, but also, on the other, provided those interested in it and wanting to learn it (or having to learn it) with a means of doing so, and, as already indicated, there were increasing numbers of those. At the same time, the language was also being used on national radio, the Government and missions began publishing different kinds of materials in it and language learning classes were started in it. Initially, radio programmes were limited to the "Native People's Session" which was broadcast daily in the afternoons on 9PA by the Australian Broadcasting Commission radio station in Port Moresby. This session was a programme of news, infonnation and entertainment organized by Mr P. Livingstone, an ex-Army wartime broadcaster at the time seconded to the Department of Education. Subsequently, district radio stations were set up in various strategic positions, notably at Kerema (1964), Daru (1965), Samarai (1967), Popondetta (192) and Port

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

Moresby (1974), and broadcast much, if not continuously, in Police Motu (Mackay 1976). At the same time, the Government used Police Motu mainly for preparing instruction and information leaflets designed for use in extension services, but gradually the role of the language was expanded into preparing newspapers and other mass communication materials in it after a Department of Information and Extension Services was set up (Brett et al. 1962). The missions, especially the smaller more scattered and more recently arrived ones, on the other hand, restricted their use of Police Motu to religious materials, while the four older, larger and well-established ones (the London Missionary Society (LMS), Anglicans, Methodists, Roman Catholics) did not need to use Police Motu because of their knowledge and use of other local languages. Thus, for example, the Papua New Guinea Union Mission of the Seventh Day Adventist Church (hereafter called the SDA Mission) used Police Motu for lesson pamphlets and the Jehovah's Witnesses also used it for some of their publications. Meanwhile, as the Administration expanded it began to think more seriously about language problems and how to make its publications and broadcasting more effective. As a result, it commissioned the Summer Institute of Linguistics to make the first survey of the language in 1961. The purpose of this survey was to determine: "the extent to which the Motu and Police Motu languages are spoken and understood in Papua, to determine the dialectal variations of each, and to produce a dictionary of Police Motu." (Brett et al. 1962: 7) This was quite a milestone in the history of the language, for it not only gave official recognition to it but also showed that it was not merely a corruption of 'true'

459

Motu which varied more or less randomly from place to place (Chatterton 1950: 5), but was a real language with its own grammar and vocabulary, however, much of that may be drawn from 'true' Motu. Thus, the survey showed that: "although there are considerable local variations of Police Motu and numerous differences of pronunciation, this trade language may readily be classified as consisting of two dialects ... the Central dialect and ... the Non-Central dialect." (p. 9) Brett's survey showed that Police Motu was at that time spoken throughout the whole of Papua except for those areas which have had little contact with the Administration (as in distant parts of the Western, Gulf, and Southern Highlands Districts) or where there were competing church languages (e.g. in the Milne Bay District). The highest percentage of speakers is, understandably, to be found in the Central District with the percentages diminishing as one moves away from Port Moresby and inland except for the Purari River delta area where it has almost become a vernacular following the socalled Tommy Kabu Movement there in the 1950s. At that time, the number of speakers was estimated to be approximately 65,000 although this did not include 12,000 Motu and Koita villagers around Port Moresby who speak 'true' Motu as first or second language. Regarding the grammatical and lexical properties of the language, Brett et al (1962) found that there was no single standard, but a series of varieties differing in structural complexity and sound system. They represented varying degrees of differences within two dialects-the Central, or Austronesian, dialect and the non-Central, or non-Austronesian, dialect. The first of these is that used mostly by speakers from the Central District (now Province) whose native languages are Austronesian; the other variant is the Hiri

460

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

Motu (the new name for Police Motu) used by speakers from other parts of the Central District and from other districts (now provinces) of Papua where the languages are mostly spread and several authors have advocated that it (or selected parts of it) should be regarded as the standard variety for purposes of general communication throughout Papua. It differs from the Central or Austronesian variant in having a

number of grammatical features which are not typical of that variety. For example, where the Central dialect generally follows the 'true' Motu manner of indicating possession with parts of the body and kinship terms, as well as in its manner of marking pronoun objects in the verb, the non-Central dialect does not. Compare, for example, the following:

English

'true'Motu

Central Hiri Motu

non-Central Hiri Motu

'~father'

tama- gll.

lau-egu tanwna

'your father'

tama-mu

'his head' 'I saw you'

kwara-na no ita-mu

( lau-egu tanwna (tanw- gyl ( oi-emu tamana (tanw- mu I ia-ena kwara-na (tau ita-mul (lau itaia QjJ

Generally too, the phonology and grammar of the Central or Austronesian dialect is closer to 'true' Motu. Around the time Brett's survey was published, the first dictionary in the language was compiled and published. This dictionary was very popular and became the standard reference work for translators and language learners. The survey and the dictionary were thus important in giving further public recognition to the language and in helping to change attitudes towards it, attitudes that were both manifested by and added to by other publications such as Police Motu: An introduction to the trade Language of Papua (New Guinea) for anthropoLogists and other fieLd workers (Wurm-Harris 1963), for example. But other things were happening which tended to work against the position that Police Motu had reached, or at least, was seen, or feared, by some to be doing so.

oi-emu tanwna ia-ena kwarana (oi lau itaia)

These changes began subtly in the postwar reconstruction period when the Public Services of the then combined Territory of Papua-New Guinea expanded. In the old days, field officers were appointed to either the Papuan or the New Guinean administration, and, as members of such, were expected to learn the major lingua franca of each, Police Motu for Papua and New Guinea Pidgin for New Guinea. Now, however, they were appointed to the Public Service of the Territory of Papua-New Guinea and, as such, could be freely transferred between what used to be two separate territories with different traditions. As a result, field staff, but especially the newer contract officers who began arriving during the 1960s, began to feel, rightly or wrongly, that if it was necessary to learn a lingua franca at all New Guinea Pidgin was the obvious choice, at least in the first instance, for it was not only the more useful (because of the greater number of

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

speakers, for example), but it was also the easier to learn because of its historical connection with English. These attitudes developed despite the fact that some effort was made by the Administration in the late 1950s and early 1960s to encourage staff to learn native languages as a means of increasing rapport with local populations, firstly, by sending selected members of its field staff to language-learning training schools conducted especially for the Administration by the Summer Institute of Linguistics, and secondly, as already noted, by offering classes in Police Motu in Port Moresby. However, the results of both these programmes were, unfortunately, seriously affected by conditions in the service that supported them. Thus, the former scheme suffered from all-toofrequent staff transfers and the latter from the fact that the classes in Port Moresby did not cater for those who needed them most, notably the field officer remote from the administrative capital. The negative effect that these developments had were exacerbated as administration itself became more and more decentralized, firstly into local government councils and subsequently into Provincial Governments as the country was prepared for Home Rule and later for Independence in 1975. As a result, the old basis for

461

support for the language was further undermined. Gradually, the old all-powerful Police Motu-speaking Patrol Officer with his roving band of police was replaced, not only by Pidgin Englishspeaking ones, but also by councils and committees of locally elected representatives, by local councils and by 'advisers' who had few of the old Patrol Officer's powers (although they were often the same persons). And because most councils were based on linguistic groupings in which there was usually one or a small number of widely known local languages, there was no longer any need for a lingua franca such as Police Motu. The old power structure was gone and the new one dictated new rules. As a result, the need for Police Motu was downgraded as local regional languages stepped in to take over its role. Not only that, but English, which was being vigorously promoted, was spreading, as was Tok Pisin. Both of these had, and still have, much more prestige nationally than Police Motu and both were spreading into social domains and geographical areas previously the preserve of Police Motu. Still the figures from the 1966 census confirm the dominant role of Police Motu in the Coastal areas of Papua:

The number and proportion of Papuans and New Guineans age ten and over speaking Tok Pisin, English and Hiri Motu in each district

Districts Papuan Coastal

Central Northern Gulf Milne Bay Western

Tok Pisin % No. 25,630 7,267 2,873 3,547 1,844

28.2 19.1 8.0 5.2 4.5

English % No. 37,381 13,464 7,189 16,169 5,305

41.1 35.4 20.1 23.9 12.8

Hiri Motu % No. 55,018 14,686 12,097 16,714 9,825

60.5 38.6 33.8 24.7 23.8

462

P. Miihlhtiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S. A. Wurm

The next census, that of 1971, shows a considerable increase in the absolute number of Police Motu speakers but only a small increase in relative numbers. At the

same time, the role of English and Tok Pisin has become a much more dominant one.

The number and proportion of Papuans and New Guineans age ten and over speaking Tok Pisin, English and Hiri Motu in each district

Districts Papuan Coastal

Central Northern Gulf Mi1neBay Western

Tok Pisin % No. 41,772 11,989 4,446 5,742 4,198

36.0 28.5 12.5 8.1 9.5

Ones reaction to the linguistic demographic and political situation that was developing took the form of a Study Conference on Police Motu held in Port Moresby in May 1971, which was organized by the Department of Information and Extension Services. Theoretically, this conference was called to consider whether or not a new dictionary of Police Motu should be commissioned by the Department as stocks of the old 1962 dictionary were running low and there were reports that the language had undergone changes over the intervening ten years. But it is clear from the published proceedings of that conference that a more fundamental issue, albeit an associated one, was the status of Police Motu vis-a.-vis New Guinea Pidgin. The Administrator pointed to this concern when he said in his opening address to the conference that he thought Police Motu speakers probably 'felt themselves to be on the defensive lately' (p. 1) because of the rapid development of New Guinea Pidgin; Dr John Guise, MHA (Member of the House of Assembly) and Speaker of the national parliament at the time, in taking up this remark, categorically asserted that Police Motu was 'not a dying language' (p.

English % No. 52,381 18,682 8,491 25,020 10,627

45.5 44.5 23.9 35.3 24.0

Hiri Motu No. % 70,671 18,684 12,701 17,665 12,742

60.9 44.5 35.7 24.9 28.8

3) as many 'experts' had claimed and he threatened to make a political issue out of it if attitudes towards it did not change (including those of the national parliament); and the recommendations of a Standing Committee set up at the conference 'to deal with the problems' (p. 9) of the language are mainly concerned with ways of promoting it (p.10). The publication of a new dictionary, while it may have been needed for other purposes, was but one means of drawing attention to the language. Another was a name change. The conference agreed that the name should be changed because, as one of the members of the conference pointed out later: "since the amalgamation of the territories of Papua and New Guinea in 1946, the combined police force, in which New Guineans are in a majority, has largely swung over to the use of New Guinea's lingua franca, Pidgin. The term 'Police Motu' has therefore become an anachronism" (Chatterton 1971: 1) The name Hiri Motu was proposed and adopted for the language by the conference and was used in the title of The Dictionary and Grammar of Hiri Motu that was produced by the Department of Information

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

and Extension Services, and subsequent publications have generally used it, although, for reasons that have been discussed herein, the name itself is not historically accurate and is not widely used by speakers of the language outside of the Port Moresby area. But to return to the status of the language. It is doubtful if the Conference on Police Motu would have achieved the equality of Police Motu (now Hiri Motu) with Tok Pisin that was being sought for it had it not been for political developments in the late 1960s and early 1970s which were a different expression of Papuan fears about a union with New Guinea which, more than anything else, drew Papuans' attention to the language and their own identity. These developments were those concerned with the granting of Home Rule and Independence of Papua New Guinea and within that, to the relative position of Papua vis-a.-vis its sister territory New Guinea. Not everyone was happy with the idea of a union between Papua and New Guinea, because it was feared that Papua, always regarded as the poorer of the two in natural resources and economic development potential, would be dominated by New Guinea and treated as its poorer cousin. This uneasiness spawned an antiunion, anti-New Guinea movement called the Papuan Separatist Movement of Papua Besena (from Motu bese 'descendants, tribe, nation') whose aim was to oppose such a unification (Chatterton 1974: 113). In its struggle against integration, this movement emphasised Papuan (as distinct from New Guinean) ethnicity, identity and solidarity. Although it was not claimed as such openly, much of the support for these claims was based on the fact that Police or Hiri Motu was the lingua franca of Papua, and this language was used in most of the movement's anti-unification campaigns and rallies. Of course these claims were

463

technically false. The political boundary of Papua was not based on any ethnic groupings. In fact it divided languages and tribes in the Southern Highlands and Gulf Provinces. In addition, Police or Hiri Motu was not, and is not, evenly dis-tributed geographically throughout the whole of Papua. Moreover, in those areas where it was spoken at the time, it was spoken more by men than women. Again New Guinea Pidgin was spoken in some parts just as much if not more than Police or Hiri Motu. Despite such facts the ethnicity claims were emotionally appealing and politically effective, and the fact that they were expounded vehemently and eloquently in both English and Hiri Motu by the attractive leader of the movement, Ms Josephine Abaijah, added to their appeal. In the end Papua did join New Guinea in a political union in 1975, and Hiri Motu was guaranteed equal status with New Guinea Pidgin: both were recognized as national languages. Police Motu had thus indeed come a long way in the past hundred years. Its status had never been higher. The predictions that it would die out as New Guinea Pidgin spread rapidly throughout Papua after Independence did not come to pass. There had never been so much public use made of the language for mass communication and other purposes as has been seen since Independence. Currently, the language is used daily on both the National Service and Provincial Stations of the National Broadcasting Service. It is the main language of broadcasts of Radio Central (Port Moresby), Gulf (Kerema), Western (Daru), and Northern (Popondetta). And the Government injected new life into its ailing newspaper of the early seventies, lseda Sivarai, and put out a news sheet called Kamonai as well. In addition, departmental publications have increased and the Government translators are kept so busy with requests that they

464

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

cannot keep up with the demand. At the same time, there was a wide range of religious organizations involved in publishing in the language and organized language-learning also increased. Of particular note was that the University of Papua New Guinea took a leading role by introducing Hiri Motu (and Tok Pisin) courses into its normal course structure. These courses are taught by Papua New Guineans and the University sees them as providing an important community service by way of helping to make sure that future community workers (whether public servants or not) go out from the University with at least a basic knowledge of the language that is necessary to communicate effectively with the people they are supposed to be helping. Similar knowledge is also useful for intra-university communications and public relations purposes. The changed attitudes represented by the foregoing developments are rather surprising in view of the past history of the language, but are readily understandable in terms of the recent political and other history of Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea in recent years has undergone massive changes and it does not seem possible for anyone to predict what will happen to Hiri Motu in the future. What is worth pointing out, however, is that the future of the language will depend, as does that of all languages, on many factors, not the least of which are attitudes towards it and the social role it is called on to play. As we have seen, Hiri Motu arose (as Police Motu) out of the need for Papuans and others to communicate with one another and it will just as surely die away if that need ever dies or is taken over by some other language. Languages are not static systems that remain the same for all time, they change and develop in response to the social conditions in which they are used. The present status of, and conditions under which Hiri Motu is used suggest that

it will be around for a long time to come although not necessarily - in fact most likely not-in its present form or distribution. Indeed the language is already undergoing changes in response to the new situations in which it is being used. This can most easily be seen in the vocabulary where new words for new items and activities have been taken over from English and/or Tok Pisin, the two main languages with which Hiri Motu is in contact. Some of these appear in the Government's The dictionary and grammar of Hiri Motu already referred to (e.g. agenisi 'disagreement, conflict, opposed to', ampaea 'umpire', aplikesini 'application', ba 'bar, hotel', bame pa 'bump into, have an accident', etc.). There are many others, however, such as piknik karaia 'to picnic', motabaiki 'motorbike', stopu 'stop', tetefoni 'telephone', rini 'to ring (on a telephone)', boksing 'boxing', bakadi (bona kok) 'rum (and coke)', sekap 'check up', seamani 'chairman', prais 'prize', haonea 'to switch on', and those associated with sports, politics, commerce, house-breaking, car stealing, drinking and brawling, that do not appear in that dictionary. Such borrowing is also having an effect on the grammar of Hiri Motu. Thus, for example, some speakers are beginning to use Tok Pisin verbs in their Hiri Motu. This is especially noticeable when Tok Pisin verbs are simpler (in the sense that a single form conveys the same sense as several Hiri Motu words) than the corresponding Hiri Motu ones. For example, Tok Pisin skelim conveys the same sense as Hiri Motu atoa sikeli dekena(i) (lit. 'to put (something) on the scales') 'to weight or share out (something)'. If this kind of borrowing continues it could eventually have important consequences for the language by way of complicating its transitive verb system. Thus, whereas Tok Pisin transi-

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue tranche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

tive verbs are normally marked for transitivity by a final syllable -im (e.g. skelim, iukim), similar verbs in Hiri Motu are normally marked by a final a or ia (e.g. atoa 'to put', itaia 'to see'). When Tok Pisin verbs are taken over into Hiri Motu their transitivity marker -im goes with them and they are not marked in the normal Hiri Motu way. They thus constitute exceptions in the language. In other, less obvious, respects the language is changing too. Whereas, for example, Hiri Motu was a pidgin language that was learned and used as a second or third or whatever number language by Papuans besides their own mother tongues, it is reported that the language is now being learned by some, in mixed marriages, for instance, as a first language or mother tongue. When that happens it is said by linguists to have become a creole (or become creolized) and at the same time, is likely to have undergone extensive changes as the language is moulded to fulfil all the functions of a mother tongue. Regrettably, no investigation has been made of this phenomenon to date, but it is something that should be undertaken as it is not only interesting in itself, for communication purposes, but is also of interest to linguists who study pidgin and creole languages in other parts of the world. 11.3. Tetlin According to the most comprehensive accounts of this language (Morris 1984 and Thomaz 1988) traditional Tetun is spoken as a first language in two areas of Timor. Its main importance lies in its use as the principal second language throughout most of East Timor. A creolised variety of this lingua franca-much influenced by Portuguese, is spoken around the capital Dili. It is this latter variety which has become the focus of national identity of the East Timorese in their struggle for political independence from Indonesia.

465

As Thomaz (1981: 5) states: During the present century, the development of Dili as a commercial and administrative centre, having increasing relations with, and influence over the hinterland, has further facilitated the expansion of Tetun-Pra9a, as well as the generalization of the capital's linguistic patterns. By becoming something common to all the Timorese peoples, but not in use outside the island, Tetun (along with other cultural factors, such as Catholicism) is gradually assuming a unifying and differentiating role in East Timor, almost as the national languages do in Europe. The use of Ternn as a lingua franca precedes the arrival of the Portuguese in 1514 and the setting up of the Catholic Mission in 1567. Thomaz expresses the view (p. 5) that "the use of Tetun as a vehicular language is related to the conquest of the Eastern half of the island by a military Ternn speaking aristocracy" but details as to how and when this occurred are not given. What is uncontroversial, however, is that the main development of Ternn was promoted by the Portuguese presence. Thus: (1) Tetun was developed and used as a mission lingua franca from the early 19th century. (2) The relocation of Portuguese Timor's capital from Lifau (Oe-cussi) to Dili in 1769 and the subsequent economic and cultural development of the capital (popularly called pra~a 'place, fortress'). The variety spoken in Dili came to be known as Ternn-Pra9a. (3) The setting up of education centres, first at Saibada in 1898 and then in Dili after World War II. (4) The gradual change over from indirect rule by local 'Kings' to direct rule by a Portuguese colonial administration around the tum of the 20th century. (5) The influx of Portuguese coffee plantations and the setting up of a plantation economy in the hills behind Dili.

466

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

All these factors promoted a gradual acculturation of the local population. The linguistic expression of the many cultural and economic changes was Terun. Thomaz is dismissive of earlier accounts of the sociolinguistic history of the language (p. 2) In Timor I have heard two different opinions about its origin, both of which appear to be mistaken. The theory that Tetlin was diffused by the missionaries from the College of Soibada-situated in one of the purest Terun-speaking zones - is inconsistent with the fact that this college dates from 1898, half a century after the first authentic evidence of the spread of Tetlin throughout the island. The opinion that it spread out from the capital of the territory, OHi, where it is at present spoken as first language, appears to be equally erroneous, since there are signs-such as place-names and oral traditions - that formerly the language spoken at Oili was Mambae, which is still spoken all around the town, Tetlin being confined to a small area of four or five miles' radius. On the contrary, it seems likely that Tetlin is spoken at Oili because it is a lingua franca, since Oili, as capital of the territory is a meeting-place for people of different origins and languages. However, it needs to be borne in mind that the label Terun stands for many kinds of language and that the relationship between present day TetlinPraya and the lingua franca encountered by the first generation of Portuguese colonizers may not be any closer than that between the ancient tribal Motu language of Port Moresby and present day Hiri Motu. It seems quite likely that the Terun of Soibada College was not dissimilar in kind to the boarding school creoles that sprang up in other parts of the Pacific Hemisphere (Unserdeutsch at Vunapope, Torres Strait Broken at St Paul, Kriol at Ngukurr)

and that this school remained the primary centre of linguistic innovation until World War II. Following the re-establishment of Portugal's colonial administration in 1945, the importance of Soibada declined and OBi became the centre of diffusion which it continues to be. In 1975, Indonesia invaded and annexed East Timor. Since then, the role of Terun language has diminished dramatically. With very little reliable information getting out of East Timor it is difficult to assess the continuing viability of the language and its user. 12. Conclusions In a trivial sense, almost all languages spoken in the Pacific Hemisphere area today are post-contact languages, influenced by non-traditional modes of intercultural communication. However, only a small number of them can be found to have adopted a wide range of new roles and to have expanded beyond their traditional area of currency. This text has been concerned with the neglected phenomenon of indigenous languages that developed into pidgins, koines and lingue franche. What we have presented here is the beginnings of a butterfly collection rather than a final statement. In spite of the very uneven coverage of the area, it is clear that we are dealing with linguistic phenomena that have played an important role in the transition from a traditional to a present-day modem language ecology. Next to understanding linguistic and culture change, the study of post-contact varieties of indigenous languages is an important counterbalance against the dominance of studies concerned with European-based pidgins. Statements about universals of pidgin and koine development stand in need of the corrective afforded by the languages mentioned in this text as does the still often encountered view that the languages that emerge in colonial contact situations have to be 'European-based' .

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

467

Notes 1. Pidgins are both indices and instruments of acculturation. Without them, culture change would be a much more painful and discontinuous process. 2. Reinecke (1969: 26) reports on estimates as to the nature of Hawaiians in the whaling

industry. Out of a total population of 80,000 in 1846 "nearly three thousand Hawaiians in the prime of life were serving on foreign vessels". 3. I = inclusive; T = trial; X = exclusive; P = plural; D = Dual.

References Abel, C. 1977 "Missionary Lingue Franche: Suau", in: Wurm (ed.), 971-988. Barz, Richard-Jeff Siegel (eds.) 1988 Language transplanted: the development of overseas Hindi. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Bell, Allan-Janet Holmes (eds.) 1990 New Zealand ways of speaking. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bickerton, Derek-V. Wilson 1987 "Pidgin in Hawaiian", in: Gilbert (ed.), 61-76 Bligh, W. 1792 A voyage to the South Sea. London: George Nicol. Bloomfield, Leonard 1969 Language. London, Allan & Unwin. Brett, R. et al 1962 A survey of Motu and Police Motu. Port Moresby: Department of Information and Extension Services. Campbell, A. 1822 A voyage round the world. Charleston: Duke & Brown. Carle, Rainer-Marline Heinschke-Peter W. Pink-Christa Rost-Karen Stradtlander (eds.) 1982 GA VA: Studies in Austronesian languages and cultures. Berlin: Reimer Census 1984 Resultats du Recensement de la population dans les Territoires d'Outre-Mer 15 Octobre 1983: Polynesie Franraise. Paris: INSEE.

1988 Results du recensement de la population dans les Territoires d'Outre-Mer: Polynesie Fran~aise. Paris: INSEE. Chatterton, Percy 1946 A primer of Police Motu. Port Moresby: Department of Education. 1950 A primer of Police Motu. Cairns: Cairns Pout. 1970 "The origin and development of Police Motu", Kivung 3: 95-98. 1971 Opening remarks by the chairman, study conference on Police Motu, Port Moresby 2425 May. 1974 Day that I have loved. Sydney: Pacific Publications. Clark, Ross 1979 "In search of Beach-la-Mar", Te Reo 22: 3-64. 1990 "Pidgin English and Pidgin Maori in New Zealand", in: Bell-Holmes (eds.), 97114. Collie, A. 1834 "Anecdotes and remarks relative to the Aborigines of King George's Sound", Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal, July/August, education. Day, Richard R. 1987 "Early pidginization in Hawaii", m: Gilbert (ed.), 163-176. Dodge, Ernest 1971 Whaling off Tahiti; Societe des Oceanistes; Dossier 11, Paris.

468

P. Muhlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D. T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

Dodge, E.S. 1972 "A William Lockerby manuscript in the Peabody Museum in Salem", Journal of Pacific History 7: 182-188 Drechsel, Emanuel-Haunami Makua Kane 1982 "Hawaiian loan words in two native American Indian pidgins", International Journal of American Linguistics 48(4): 460467 Duranti, Alessandra 1981 The Samoan fono: a sociolinguistic study. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics B-80. Dutton, Thomas E. 1985 Police Motu: lena Sivarai. Port Moresby: University of Papua New Guinea Press. 1986 "Police Motu and the Second W orId War", in: Paul Geraghty-Lois CarringtonS.A. Wurm (eds.), FOCAL II: papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 351-406. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-94. 1987 "Successful intercourse was had with the natives - aspects of European contact methods in the Pacific", in: Donald C. LaycockWerner Winter (eds.), A world of language: papers presented to Professor S.A. Wurm on his 65th birthday, 153-171. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-1 00. Ferguson, Charles A. 1959 "Diglossia", Word 15: 325-340. Ferguson, CharIes-C.E. DeBose 1977 "Simplified registers, broken language and pidginization", in: Valdman (ed.), 99-125. Fischer, J.L. 1979 "The speech community of PonapeCaroline Islands", Language Sciences, 1(1): 85-93. Gilbert, Glenn (ed.) 1987 Pidgin and creole languages. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Heider, Karl 1979 Grand Valley Dani: peaceful warriors. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kuva, Aduru 1974 The Solomons community in Fiji. Suva: South Pacific Social Sciences Foundation. Lavondes, Henri 1971 "Language policy, language engineering and literacy: French Polynesia", in: Sebeok, T.A. (ed.), 1110-1128. Lieber, Michael D. (ed.) 1977 Exiles and migrants in Oceania. Honolulu: Hawaii University Press. Mackay, I.D. 1976 Broadcasting in Papua New Guinea. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press Marion, N.D. 1985 Extracts from journals relating to the visit to New Zealand. Wellington: Alexandra Turnbull Library Endowment Trust. Melville, Herman 1847 Omoo: A narrative of adventures in the South Seas. New York, Harper & Brothers. Millet, Mrs Edward 1872 An Australian parsonage. London: Edward & Stanford. Moag, Rodney 1977 Fiji Hindi: a basic course and reference grammar. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Moench, R. 1963 Economic relations of the Chinese in the Society Islands. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, Harvard University. Morris, Cliff 1984 Tetlin-English dictionary. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-83. Mosel, Ulrike 1982 "The influence of the church missions on the development of Tolai", in: Carle (et al) (eds.), 155-172. Miihlhaus1er, Peter-Rom Harre 1990 Pronouns and people. Oxford: Blackwell Nicholas, J.L. 1817 Narrative of a voyage to New Zealand. London: James Black & Son. Phillips, Nigel-Khaidir Anwar (eds.) 1981 Papers on Indonesian languages and literatures. Cahier d'Archipel13.

Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages

Pillai, Raymond C. 1975 Fiji Hindi as a creole language. M.A. thesis, Southern Illinios University. Reinecke, John E. 1969 Language and dialect in Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Roberts, Julian 1991 The origins of Pidgin in Hawaii, paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Honolulu. forthcoming "Pidgin Hawaiian: a sociohistorical study" to appear in: Journal of Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Rule, Joan 1977 "Vernacular literacy in Irian Jaya" , in: S.A. Wurm (ed.), 403-409. Samarin, William J. 1989 "The colonial heritage of the Central African Republic", International Journal of African Historical Studies 22(4): 697-711. Savage, J. 1807 Some account of New Zealand. London: John Murray. Schooling, S. 1981 A linguistic and sociolinguistic survey of French Polynesia. June, 1981. mimeo. Schuchardt, Hugo 1979 The ethnography of variation - selected writings on pidgins and creoles~ translated by T.L. Markey, Ann Arbor: Karoma. Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.) 1971 Current Trends in Linguistics 8: Linguistics in Oceania. Mouton: The Hague. Siegel, Jeff 1972 The Indian speech community in Fiji. Unpublished, University of Hawaii Pacific Collection. 1973 A survey of language use in the Indian speech community of Fiji. Unpublished, East West Center, Culture Learning Institute, Resource Materials Collection.

469

1975 "Fiji Hindustani", University of Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics 7(3):127-44. 1977 Say it in Fiji Hindi. Sydney: Pacific Publications. 1982 "Plantation Pidgin Fijian", Oceanic Linguistics 21(1-2): 1-72. 1985a "Origins of Pacific Islanders in Fiji", Journal of Pacific History 20: 32-42. 1985b "Koines and Koineization", Language in Society 14(3): 357-378. 1986a "Wai: a Malaitan language in Fiji", in: Paul Geraghty-Lois Carrington-S.A. Wurm (eds.), FOCAL I: papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 435-465. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-94. 1986b "Pidgin English in Fiji", Pacific Studies 9(3): 53-106. 1987 Language contact in a plantation environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stirling, James 1833 Journals of several expeditions made in Australia. London: J. Cross Thomaz, Luis Filipe 1981 "The formation of Tetun-Praza, vehicular language of East Timor", in: Philipps-Anwar (eds.), 1-30. Tiwari, Bholanath 1979 "Fiji Bat", GaganacaI2(4): 97-100. Valdman, Albert (ed.) 1977 Pidgin and creole linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Wurm, S.A.-J.c. Harris 1963 Police Motu: an introduction to the trade language of Papua (New Guinea). Canberra. Pacific Linguistics B-1. Wurm, S.A. (ed.) 1977 New Guinea area languages and language study, vol. 3, Language, culture, society, and the modern world. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-40.

470

P. Miihlhiiusler, T.E. Dutton, D.T. Tryon, S.A. Wurm

Relevant maps Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche based on indigenous languages (excluding mission languages). Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler. Map 45. Tukang Besi as lingua franca. Compiled by Mark Donohue. Map 77. Hiri (formerly Police) Motu: its history and distribution. Compiled by Tom Dutton. Map 28. Russian-Chinese Pidgin and language situation in the Far East. Compiled by Vladimir I. Belikov. Map 116. The far northeast of Russia. Compiled by Elena s. Maslova and Nikolay B. Vakhtin. Map 111.

Some lingue franche and pidgins in North Siberian and North Pacific areas at the beginning of the 20th century. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm. Map 110. The impact of Pidgin Hawaiian on Eskimo and Chinook Jargon. Compiled by Emanuel J. Drechsel and Haunami Makua Kane. Map 126. Eskimo interethnic contacts: Bering Strait and Alaska area. Compiled by Hein van der Voort. Map 118. Eskimo interethnic contacts: Northeastern Canada and Greenland. Compiled by Hein van der Voort. Map 119.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century (excluding Australia) Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhausler, Philip Baker Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction This contribution supplements the detailed lexical and grammatical information given in the chapters on the diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. Again, whilst the lesser known varieties of Polynesia and Micronesia will be mentioned, its main thrust is an account of the sociohistorical and linguistics factors involved in bringing into being the three big Melanesian Pidgins (MPE), Tok Pisin, Bislama and Solomon Islands Pijin. Prior to Clark's (1979) article In search of Beach-La-mar, linguists who had concerned themselves with the origin of MPE had generally restricted their interest to a particular variety and were unaware of the full range of Pacific territories for which 19th century samples of pidginized English are known. Clark, whose article was appropriately subtitled Towards a history of Pacific Pidgin English, discussed the distribution of thirty grammatical and lexical items in eleven pidgins and creoles and reviewed other historical and documentary evidence. His view of the relationships between these pidgins and creoles has been discussed in detail in the articles on diffusion. A second view on development in the 19th century, is Keesing's (1988) account of the origins of MPE which differs from that of Clark (1979), primarily in assigning an early key role to what he terms the central Pacific islands (the Carolines, Kiribati and Rotuma). His assumptions regarding the development of MPE may be summarized in the form of a timetable, as follows:

(i)

A Worldwide Nautical Pidgin English (WNPE) existed before whaling became a major activity in the Pacific, i.e. by the early 19th century at latest (1988: 4). (ii) A distinctive Pacific Nautical Pidgin English (PNPE) began to develop from WNPE in the

central Pacific in the 1840s when whaling was at its height (1988: 15). (iii) PNPE was introduced southwards into New Caledonia and the Loyalties by about 1860 (1988: 25). (iv) In the early 1860s there was a single dialect of Pacific pidgin, largely shipboard-based, which provided the linguistic input into plantations in Queensland, Samoa, New Caledonia, Fiji, the Marshalls, and other areas (1988: 53), and it was Islanders, not Europeans, who by the onset of the Labor Trade [=1863] were the fluent speakers of a developing pidgin (1988: 41). (v) By the late 1880s, there had emerged a remarkably stabilized and expanded pidgin in the Pacific (1988: 89). These theoretical questions require two kinds of answer: (a)

analysis of the linguistic data pertinent to reconstructing putative past scenarios and,

(b) detailed information about the sociohis-torical context of these languages.

The linguistic data figuring in the development and diffusion of Pacific Pidgin English are given in three separate articles. The present contribution contains some additional linguistic data future researchers may wish to consider but concentrates on questions of sociohistorical development. As pidgin and creole languages pose particular problems to conventional historical reconstruction, such external information will be of crucial importance in reconstructing the linguistic past of these languages.

472

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

2. Types of English-derived contact languages One can distinguish between three main types of pidgins according to the social functions they have fulfilled in the various parts of the Pacific. They are as follows:

(a)

jargons used in short-term communication between Europeans and the local population,

(b)

pidgins that sprang up in either trading ports or on plantations, and

(c)

pidgins transported from plantations to the main recruiting areas (nativized pidgins).

Such a division can at best be an abstract ideal, since in reality much more complex configurations of forces tended to shape the individual varieties. The distinction between jargon-plantation pidgin and nativized pidgin is not just social but is also reflected in a number of linguistic characteristics of these languages. Thus, one can conceive of a scale of both stability and complexity ranging from unstable impoverished jargons to fully fledged expanded pidgins. Whereas jargons constitute individual attempts at communication across linguistic boundaries (e.g. by means of baby-talk or ad hoc simplifications), true pidgins are socially sanctioned linguistic systems. The diverse character of the individual languages labeled 'English-based pidgins' has led to the failure of attempts to determine their precise number (see Mtihlhausler 1985) and to draw clear boundaries between them. This is particularly true of the jargons, which exhibit a great deal of fluctuation and instability and have led observers such as London (1909) or Churchill (1911) to subsume all such varieties under the label 'Beachla-Mar' . Jargonized varieties of English have been reported from numerous parts of the southwestern Pacific including Micronesia (Hall 1945), the Gilbert and Ellice Islands (David 1899), and New Hebrides and New Guinea, where the jargonized varieties were later supplanted by a true pidgin. Churchill (1911: 8) speaks of " ... sporadic foci of evolution of some mongrel dialects, each

narrowly restricted in essential conditions to one or at most two white men, and the few communities of islanders with which they were in intimate contact." A particular problem is the mobility of early jargon speakers. Jargon English was used extensively on board the trading and whaling vessels that ploughed the Pacific. The principal ports of the region such as Sydney, Honolulu and Canton subsequently became important centres for the cross fertilization and diffusion of lexical and grammatical conventions. More research is needed on the use of English-based jargons in their Maritime setting.

3. Language in beach communities of Micronesia Intermediate between the shortlived shipboard and more permanent plantations are the so-called beach communities made up of whalers, traders, beachcombers and unemployed or deserted boats' crew. In spite of their potential great linguistic importance, relatively little document-ation is available on the use of English-derived forms of speech in these societies-not sur-prisingly so, considering that most of their users were illiterate and that the legality of many of these communities was far from universally recognized. Keesing (1988) has identified Ponape (Micronesia) as one of the most important foci for the development of a more sophisticated Pidgin English. By 1850, there were about 150 foreigners in Ponape, mainly men who lived with local women. Among the few linguistic data surviving from this period is the following one (quoted from Keesing, p.17):

... to communicate with the ships, Pohnpeians acquired a pidgin trade language. Sailors stepping ashore on the island were often greeted with a 'Hello Jack! Give us a chew of [tobacco]?' He cites an interchange in which a Pohnpeian proceeding on to the ship, ... climbed aboard and said to the captain in his best pidgin English: 'Look Kepin, you see

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

women? Stop at nan weleniahk' (the edge ofthe mangrove swamp). Kosrae was another beach community. Its resident expatriate community comprised 30 as early as 1835 but in the mid forties, permanent expatriate residents were expelled and contacts restricted to temporary business partners. The following characterization of the language used in these contacts is given by Damon (1861: 50 quoted from Keesing p.18). Before the missionaries landed upon the island [in 1852], the natives had acquired a smattering of the English language. This was merely the result of their intercourse with foreigners, principally with seamen. They were able to employ intelligently a greater number of English words than those Hawaiians who have lived for years in foreign families in Honolulu. So great was their knowledge of English, that Mr. Snow endeavoured for nearly four years after commencing his mission to preach in broken English, or Anglo-Kusaien .... But he finally aban-doned the experiment, and fell back upon the vernacular of the natives. He found it to be exceedingly difficult to communi-cate religious truths in this mixture of Kusaien, English, Spanish, Hawaiian and other languages.

473

gal go aboard ship. King no like. In night white man take plenty gal go board ship. White man kill some kanakas. Then kanakas take chests, small things ashore; then set fire to ship; burn sails, rigging, spars, casks, everything belonging to ship. Every white man was killed. ' Two more useful texts come from Hiram Bingham (1866: 16,35): Plenty white man speak me, very good tap cocoanut tree, get toddy; me say, now; no good; plenty men get drunk on shore; too much row; me like all quiet; no tap cocoanut tree on Strong's Island. Me think missionary stop board that ship .... Me want to go 'long pilot; look quick. Me no care nothing 'bout 'nother ship; that's what for I want go; look plenty.

The following texts quoted from Keesing (ibid.):

Similarly small amounts of language data are available for other parts of Micronesia. Tight control of the area by Spain in the second half of the 19th century and the transfer of sovereignty to Germany in 1899, dramatically diminished the size of beach communities and the use of Pidgin English as a medium of intercommunication. One of the most likely sources for better insights into the nature of Micronesian Pidgin English is the creole language of the island of Ngatik.

Unfortunately, few texts from Kosrae have turned up. One comes from 'King George' himself, who after years of regular dealings with European ships' masters, and later Snow, very probably spoke something closer to English than the Anglo-Kosraean pidgin: 'White man take plenty gal to aboard ship. In morning, kanaka go board ship; every kanaka: big island, small island, all go and kill every man board ship' (The Friend, November 1854, quoted in HezeI1983:1l4) Gulick (1862: 241) gives another version of this text: 'Whit man want to get

4. Ngatikese Men's Creole On the island of Ngatik, which is the main island in the Sapwuahfik Atoll, approximately ninety miles south-west of Ponape (Pohnpei) in eastern Micronesia, there is an English-based creole spoken, known as Ngatikese Men's Creole. It is discussed briefly by Poyer (1992) and McClintock (1994) in the following terms: Ngatik has a popUlation of roughly 500, who live relatively isolated from Ponape as there are no air links with the atoll. The indigenous language of Ngatik is the Sapwuahfik dialect of the Pohnpei

474

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

language, a Micronesian language belonging to the Austronesian family of languages. In addition, most Sapwuahfik people also speak the Pohnpeian dialect. However, a third speech form, Ngatikese Creole, is spoken by Sapwuahfik men among themselves. They call it 'pidgin English' or 'broken English'. Poyer reports that Sapwuahfik men are known throughout the Eastern Carolines for this type of speech, used mostly in work situations, sailing, casual conversation, recreation and joking. She observes, however, that although the men insist that women do not understand or use it, women occasionally speak 'pidgin' in joking conversation. Little of the detail of Ngatikese creole has appeared in published form. Its genesis and current status and use is, however, of considerable interest for the reconstruction of the evolution of Pacific pidgins, since the origin of Ngatikese Creole goes back to an event in 1837, namely the massacre of the entire male popu-Iation of Ngatik by a Captain Hart and the crew of the British cutter Lambton. Of the entire male population on the island, only three small male children are reported to have survived the massacre. In the years between 1837 and 1855, the population of Ngatik began to build up again. Apart from the women and children who survived the massacre, together with a few crew members and Ponapeans left behind, Gilbertese and Mortlockese men came to settle the island. According to oral tradition there were three distinct ethnic settlements on the island: American Town, the Ngatikese-Ponapean settle-ment and the Mortlockese village. At the same time, there was considerable trade with Ngatik during the post-massacre period, with twenty-three ships visiting the island between 1842 and 1852. The need for communication within the island communities on Ngatik, together with trading would have been powerful forces in the development and consolidation of Ngatikese Creole. Even as early as the 1820s it is recorded that Ponapean sailors had regular contact with Sydney and were part of the regular maritime trading network in the Pacific, where a Pacific trade jargon, the predecessor of modern-day Pacific pidgins, was already in use. It is

presumably this jargon, already in use in the Pohnpei area and in Micronesia generally from the 1820s, which developed into the Ngatikese Creole of the nineteenth century. This is the language which survives today as a special speech form used only by older Ngatikese males, but gone ago long elsewhere in Micronesia.

5. Early Pidgin English in Polynesia Marquesas and Tahiti

Early Pidgin English in Polynesia was very much associated with the whaling industry, which flourished in eastern Polynesia between 1790 and 1870. Among the most popular ports were Nuku Hiva in the Marquesas and Papeete in Tahiti, as well as Honolulu in Hawaii and the Bay of Islands in New Zealand. There was a regular and steady flow of whalers during this period. In 1847, for instance, there were nineteen whalers which called at Papeete, one French, one English and seventeen American. However, once the American Civil War ended, so too did the days of the great American whalers. Most of the whalers had full crews of Europeans, mostly from the east coast of America. However, a number of whalers succumbed to the pleasures of Polynesian life, jumping ship in Tahiti and the Marquesas, at least for a time. This constant trickle of deserters often left the whalers short-handed, and to fill the crew numbers captains often engaged Poly-nesians. In Tahiti and the Marquesas, an English-based maritime jargon was spoken, which probably never stabilised to the stage of a pidgin. It would have been reinforced towards the end of the whaling period by the arrival of a large contingent of Gilbertese to work on the plantation of William Stewart at Atimaono on the island of Tahiti in 1865. These recruits returned home after more than a decade. However, the maritime-driven English jargon which was used on the plantations in Tahiti probably withered and died there, as the main plantation labour in French Polynesia was to come from China, the first wave of labourers arriving in 1865-66. Moench (1963: 17-26)

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

reports that a second wave, much larger, came to Tahiti over a period of several years, from 19091928. These Chinese plantation workers came mainly from the Kwantung Province and were Hakka speakers in the main. The arrival of the Chinese contributed to the gradual demise of the English-based maritime pidgin, since 90% of the new arrivals spoke the same language. In their dealings with Tahitians,especially in later years once their indenture was completed and they were free to set themselves up in commerce, the Chinese developed a pidgin Tahitian, known as parau tinito, literally 'Chinese speech'. Two example texts in maritime jargon from Tahiti: Ah, Ideea, mickonaree oee? (Oh, Idea, are you a Christian?) Yes, me mickonaree, mickonaree ena (Yes, I'm a Christian, a Christian here) (Herman Melville, Omoo, 1847) Good friends, I glad to see you; and I very well like to have some talk with you today. Good friends, very bad time in Tahiti; it makes me weep. Pomare is gone-the island no more yours, but the Wee-Wee's. Good friends, you no speak, or look at them ... I spoke more by by. (Herman Melville, Omoo, 1847).

6. Hawaii At the time of writing this chapter research by Roberts on the history of Pidgin English in Hawaii was still uncompleted and the reader is advised to wait for further developments. The principal issue is whether a form of Pidgin English was used throughout the 19th century (as claimed by Holm (1989) and Goodman (1985), or whether it emerged late, in a gradual fashion as a replacement of a pre-existing Pidgin Hawaiian. The evidence given in Roberts (forth-coming) suggests that stable forms of Pidgin Hawaiian were used in the whaling, sandalwood and sugar plantation industries up to about 1890 and that similarly stable and insti-tutionalized forms of

475

English were not in evidence. An important argument in Roberts (forthcoming) is that Pidgin Hawaiian was used extensively by Japanese, Chinese and Portuguese plantation workers as a language of inter-communication in a highly multilingual setting.

7. Plantation Pidgin English 7.1. Introduction Plantation pidgins confirm the principle outlined in Hall's (1962) article on the life cycle of pidgin languages, namely that they are called into being for a specific reason, thrive as long as their raison d'etre remains, and either develop into creoles or become obsolete thereafter. The plantation industries of the Pacific began to emerge in the 1850s, with Hawaii, Samoa, Fiji, Queensland and New Caledonia being the main centres. The linguistic practices on the different plantations varied considerably. A simplified form of Hawaiian was used in Hawaii, Pidgin Fijian and Pidgin Hindustani in Fiji, Pidgin French and Pidgin English in New Caledonia and Pidgin English exclusively in Samoa and Queensland. As the language contact situation in Queensland has been dealt with in a separate article in this volume, only New Caledonia and Samoa will be considered here. The recruiting of labour for the various Pidgin English using plantations followed a relatively fixed pattern, taking place in: (a)

the Loyalty Islands in the early 1860s, the Banks and Gilbert Islands in the late 1860s, (c) Santa Cruz and the New Hebrides in the early 1870s, (d) the Solomon Islands from 1872 to 1883, (e) New Ireland and New Britain from 1879. (b)

The question as to the historical links between the various plantation pidgins on the one hand and between the pidgins in the recruiting areas on the other has been the topic of lengthy debate. What is certain is that the whole history of the development of pidgins in the southwestern Pacific is

476

Darrell T. Tryon. Peter Miihlhiiusler. Philip Baker

characterized by a long progression of mutual influences, contact, and regional mobility of populations. It is unlikely that either monogenesis, the development of the various pidgins from a single source, or independent development alone will suffice as explanation of the origin of the southwestern Pacific pidgins. Instead, one must conceive of a complex network of relationships between the various Pacific English jargons and pidgins. 7.2. Pidgin in New Caledonia English-based pidgin in New Caledonia has been recorded as early as 1842, when a number of pidgin-speaking Tannese labourers from the then New Hebrides (later Vanuatu) were taken to work at a sandalwood station on the Isle of Pines for three months. Whether this was a developed pidgin or a form of maritime jargon is not clear. In any event, Crowley (1990: 64) reports that this variety of "English" had become the effective lingua franca right around the New Caledonian coastline by 1846. James Paddon set up a permanent shore station on Aneityum in far southern Vanuatu in 1843. It was from this time onward that ni-Vanuatu began to work outside their own communities, many working at sandalwood stations on the Isle of Pines and on the New Caledonia mainland between 1848 and 1861. Paddon, in fact, moved his headquarters from Aneityum to the Isle of Pines in 1852. By 1853, Paddon had a cattle ranch near Noumea, employing many Europeans and Melanesian, especially vi-Vanuatu. The lingua franca in all of these activities was well and truly Pidgin or B islama by that time. By 1859, the French planter Jourbet employed fifty-eight Europeans and some forty "Oceaniens", almost certainly ni-Vanuatu, together with some Chinese. By 1866, there were 1,060 Europeans in New Caledonia, together with 335 other immigrants, mostly ni-Vanuatu. Many of these ni-Vanuatu came from the island of Efate or Sandwich Island as it was also known at that period. So it was that the early Bislama that developed on sandalwood stations came to develop

in other employment situations, for apart from sandalwood milling there was also considerable trade in dried sea slug, turtle shell, copra, motherof-pearl and kauri resin, to say nothing of the flourishing agricultural and pastoralist activities of the New Caledonian mainland. The exact nature of Bislama in New Caledonia is not very well known, because of the fragmentary nature of existing records. While its vocabulary in New Caledonia was largely derived from English, there appears to have been some influence from French, as Gamier reports: II est un langage en Nouvelle-Caledonie qui se parle sur toute la cote et sert de moyen de communication entre les kanaks et les blancs et quelquefois entre les blancs eux-memes, quand ils sont de nationalite differente; ce langage a pour base l' anglais, mais on y rencontre des mots franc;ais, chinois, indigenes, tous plus ou moins alteres. (Gamier 1867: 171). However, the fate of the Bislama spoken on the mainland of New Caledonia was very different from its evolution in the Loyalty Islands after the decline of the sandalwood trade in the mid 1860s, for on the mainland it suffered a sharp decline after this period. Crowley (1990: 66) suggests that the reasons for the decline of Bislama on the mainland were firstly that within two years of annexation in 1853, all but one tenth of the land had been expropriated by Europeans, leaving very little in Melanesian hands and favouring the development of large pastoral properties. On the other hand, the Loyalty Islanders were declared Melanesian reserve land, precluding any European settlement, and while over one thousand Loyalty Islanders were recruited to work on the Queensland plantations at the end of the sandalwood period, with Bislama the lingua franca, the New Caledonian mainland did not become a source for labour recruiting. Bislama did survive, however, to some extent in New Caledonia where ni-Vanuatu workers were, and to this day still are employed in the mining industry. Bislama or Beach-la-Mar as it was commonly known in the nineteenth century, was replaced as

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

a contact language on the mainland of New Caledonia by pidgin French, and later by standard French. Even though this was the case, traces of Bislama remain in the lexicon of many of the mainland languages of New Caledonia. 7.3. Samoan Plantation Pidgin (SPP)

The establishment of plantations on Samoa in the late 1860s and the recruiting of labour, first from

Year 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 rnid1885

Total No. 81 115 40 69 48 15 438 140 280 101 251 272 718 535 378 264 355 245 512

Kingsrnill Kiribati Gilbert Islands

Carolines

477

the Gilbert and Ellice Islands and later from the New Hebrides, the Solomons and New Guinea, appears to have led to a rapid stabilization of the former English-based contact jargon on a number of plantations around Apia. The following table representing the numbers and origins of labourers working on Samoan plantations gives a good indication of the shift in the recruiting grounds (cf. Moses 1973: 102):

New Hebrides

Solomons

New Britain New Ireland

81 115 40 69 48 358 140 280 101 251 189 115 300

15 80

8 2 29 124

After 1885, recruiting for the German plantations in Samoa was restricted to the Bismarck Archipelago and the German Solomons. Between 1885 and 1900 about 2,300 recruits were transported to Samoa, the majority from New Ireland (for details see Miihlhausler 1978). The early history of SPP, like that of most pidgins, is not well documented and what little has been written about this language was tucked

83 570 179 153 29 187

226 199 37 156

33 9 103 287 216 45

away in old travel descriptions, newspapers and documents. The earliest document at hand is an article by Schuchardt (1889: 158-162). The importance of this article lies in the fact that the examples of SPP listed date back to the year 1883, i.e. to a time when the first labourers from New Britain and New Ireland had just begun to arrive. The data presented may be taken as an indication that a

478

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

stabilised pidgin was found in Samoa as early as the 1870s. The pidgin described by Schuch-ardt appears to be closely related to Bichelamar of Vanuatu from where the bulk of the plantation labourers was drawn at the time. A comparison by Schuchardt's data with later data suggests that SPP underwent a number of changes in subsequent years under the impact of the influx of labourers from the New Britain and New Ireland areas. The linguistic character of early SPP appears to have resulted from two major influences: (a)

the existence of unstable varieties of jargonised English in Samoa and (b) the employment of a large number of Gilbert and Ellice islanders on the plan-tations in the 1870s. A good source of the kind of broken English spoken in Samoa are Stevenson's writings, both his short stories, such as 'the Beach of Falesa', and his diaries. The following conversation was written down in 1890 (Colvin 1911: 198): "Fanny, awfully hove-to with rheumatics and injuries received upon the field of sport and glory, chasing pigs, was unable to go up and down stairs, so she sat upon the back verandah, and my work was cheque red by her cries. 'Paul, you take a spade to do that -dig a hole first. If you do that, you'll cut your foot off! Here, you boy, what you do there? You no get work? You go find Simeie; he give you work. Peni, you tell this boy he go find Simele; suppose Simele no give him work, you tell him to 'way. I no want him here. That boy no good. '--- Peni (from the distance in reassuring tones), 'All right, sir!' --Fanny (after a long pause), 'Peni, you tell that boy go find Simele.' I no want him stand here all day. I no pay that boy. I see him all day. He no do nothing. " Accounts of Pidgin English as spoken on the Samoan plantations are numerous (for details as Miihlhausler 1978). A representative example is Baessler (1895: 23-24) who mentions that about

1,000 labourers from all parts of the South Seas could be found on the Samoan plantations. Communication with these people was easy, smce: they are all more or less proficient in Pidgin English, which they even use among themselves, since they are not familiar with individual vernaculars, whereas Pidgin English has gained access to all South Seas islands. It is a corrupted form of English, mixed with many morsels from other languages and it is adapted to the mentality of the natives; therefore words tend to be simply concatenated and conjugation and declension are avoided. Whole sentences have often come to stand for a single word and the new arrival does not always grasp the deeper meaning. Baessler (1895) provides two examples of this pidgin: you sabi this fellow on top? 'Do you know this bloke on top (i.e. God)' you speakfellow on top he make finish rain 'You say this bloke on top (i.e. God) stopped the rain' The principal linguistic importance of SPP lies in the fact that it both shares a pool of speakers (recruited labourers) with other plantation pidgins in its early years and that, after 1885, it developed exclusively among workers from New Guinea. Understanding its history can help understand why Tok Pisin of Papua New Guinea came to differ significantly from other Melanesian pidgins. 7.4. Vanuatu The first Europeans to visit Vanuatu were the Spaniard de Quieros and his crew in 1606, visiting the Banks Islands before dropping anchor in Big Bay (the Bay of St Philip and St James), in northern Santo. They mistakenly believed that they had discovered the Great South Land. They remained in Vanuatu only six weeks and were unsuccessful in their contacts with the local popu-

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

lation. The next visitor was Louis Antoine de Bougainville in 1768, followed by the Englishman James Cook in 1774. There was little language learning or verbal exchange on any of these expeditions, although some vocabularies were collected by Johann Reinhold Forster and his son on the Cook expedition. Whaling vessels plied the waters of Vanuatu from the late 1700s onward. There was one shore station established on Aneityum in the far south of the archipelago. The crews on the whaling vessels used South Seas Jargon, the precursor of modern Bislama, to communicate with the Pacific islanders. This jargon was used extensively throughout Polynesia and Micronesia before moving to Melanesia as the whaling trade moved further and further west. While the South Seas Jargon was not so much used in the whaling industry in Vanuatu, it was used extensively in seaslug and sandalwood activities. In 1825 Peter Dillon found extensive stands of sandalwood on Erromango. This much sought-after wood was used in China as incense. In 1829 the Sophia called at Erromango with a crew of 100 Tongans in order to cut sandalwood. Crowley (1990: 53) reports that relations between the Erromangans and the sandalwooders were not particularly friendly. Later in 1829 some 600 Tongans, Hawaiians and Rotumans visited Erromango. After 1830 interest in sandalwood died for almost a decade. Activity focused on the Isle of Pines (New Caledonia) in 1841, and by 1842 contacts resumed with Vanuatu. The trade in Vanuatu continued actively on a number of islands besides Erromango (Efate, Malekula and Santo) until about 1865. From 1843 onwards there were permanent shore stations in southern Vanuatu. Melanesians from a variety of islands began to work on the sandalwood ships alongside the previously exclusive European and Polynesian crews, so contributing to the development and spread of what by this time had begun to stabilise into an early form of Bislama. The first permanent shore station was a commercial colony established by James Paddon at Anelgauhat on Aneityum in 1843. He left New Zealand with 35 European colonists (17 of whom lost their lives on the way), together with 16

479

Chinese and 6 Maoris. The Chinese may have already spoken China Coast Pidgin. In 1849 there were more than 50 Europeans living on Aneityum. Later Paddon was to move his headquarters to the Isle of Pines in New Caledonia and still later to Erromango in Vanuatu. Shore stations are recorded on Aneityum 18431872, on Tanna 1847-1863 and on Erromango 1854-1864. It was the fact that the populations working on these shore stations were linguistically mixed which favoured the development of Bislama, this together with the increasing number of ni-Vanuatu engaged as crewmen on ships around the Pacific, especially between the islands of southern Melanesia and the port of Sydney. By 1860 there were 150 non-local Melanesian plantation workers on Santo, with at least 340 non-Erromangans working on Erromango at that time (Shineberg 1967: 192). From a maritime perspective, there was a brisk trade between Sydney and China via the South Seas during this period, with over 200 voyages recorded between 1841 and 1855. Adams (1984: 37) reports that between 1855 and 1865 there were 47 ships working in the sandalwood trade, with over 100 port calls on Tanna during the period 1842-1858. All of this was compounded after 1863 by the recruiting of ni-Vanuatu in great numbers for work on the cotton and sugar-cane plantations in Samoa, Fiji, New Caledonia and Queensland. During the next forty years nearly 40,000 niVanuatu were employed in these endeavours, all engaged on multi-lingual plantations (see Crowley 1990: 88-89). In Vanuatu itself the first plantation was established by H.Ross Lewin on Tanna in 1867. Lewin cultivated cotton, a profitable crop due to shortages occasioned by the American Civil War. By 1873 Lewin employed 120 labourers from Efate, following the tradition earlier established of employing non-local people where possible so as to avoid disputes with local villagers. In the early 1870s there were numer-ous plantations on Efate, mostly in the Havannah Harbour-Undine Bay area. These plantations produced corn, coffee,

480

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

cocoa, copra, sugar and cotton, using almost exclusively labour from Tanna in the south. Bedford (1971: 72) records that there were 285 non-Efate labourers on Efate in 1874, and that plantations numbered sixteen. At the same time north Efate was a regular stop-over point for recruiting vessels during the 1870s. The price of cotton declined at the end of the 1870s, however, and the British Government put restrictions on the recruiting of Vanuatu labour after 1874. In spite of this, the number of plantations continued to grow, mainly due to French activity, with 35 plantations reported on Efate by 1900. In 1882 the Compagnie Caledonienne des Nouvelles-Hebrides, led by John Higginson, an Irishman with a strong dislike of the English, began purchasing large tracts of land throughout Vanuatu, such that by the end of the 1880s most of the plantations were Frenchowned. At the tum of the twentieth century Franceville was founded near Mele on Efate. This was the beginning of the urban agglom-eration which was to become the capital city of present-day Vanuatu, Port Vila. Meanwhile, from 1870 until 1907 over 8,000 new indentured recruits were engaged to work on the plantations of Efate, added to the over 40,000 who had served in Queensland and the other plantation islands of the Pacific, New Caledonia, Fiji and Samoa. All of these factors combined to ensure that by dint of this constant mixing of different language communities over a period of nearly fifty years Bislama emerged as the lingua franca of the country par excellence. This language was to be accorded the status of national language of Vanuatu when it became an independent nation in 1980. 7.5. Pidgin in the Loyalty Islands While the Isle of Pines was a major sandalwood centre in southern Melanesia from the early 1840s onwards, reaching its peak between 1848 and 1857, there were a number of unpleasant incidents which made traders look elsewhere for cargoes of this profitable wood. A number of them traded throughout the Loyalty Islands, between the mainland of New Caledonia and Vanuatu.

Andrew Cheyne visited the Loyalties in 184142, calling at Lifu and Uvea. His journal shows that he spoke some Drehu (Lifu) and Iaai (Uvea), but his knowledge of South Seas Jargon or early Bislama is evident from his translations of exchanges in the languages of these islands. (Shineberg 1971: 98). At this early period, it is likely that there was in addition to the South Seas Jargon, heavily based on English in tenus of lexicon, another kind of contact language in use, based mainly on Polynesian vocabulary. Hollyman (1976, 1978) has identified much of this vocabulary, from such widespread Polynesian languages as Tahitian, Marquesan, Samoan, Hawaiian, Tongan and Uvean. It is doubtful whether this contact language ever developed past the jargon stage before disappearing in the French colonial era. This situation was probably also helped along by the gradual replacement of Polynesian boatcrews in the south-west Pacific by Melanesians, largely from Southern Vanuatu and the Loyalty Islands in the 1850s. Although Bislama went into decline on the New Caledonian mainland after the 1860s, it flourished in the Loyalty Islands. Anderson (1880: 156) reports, for example, that it was widely used on Mare in 1875. Between 1863 and 1875, over one thousand Loyalty Islanders were recruited as plantation labourers in Queensland, where they encountered Queensland Plantation English, a speech variety little different from early Bislama or Sandalwood English, so favouring the development of this lingua franca. After this time, recruiters moved north, engaging labour only from areas north of the Loyalties. Howe (1977: 15) reports that Loyalty Islanders were also very commonly employed as crewmen on vessels operating out of Noumea. Between 1865 and 1885, there were over 1,000 voyages to the Loyalty Islands by ships with Loyalty Island crews and English-speaking captains. In the 1870s and 1880s Loyalty Islanders were actively involved as recruiting agents in both Vanuatu and the Solomons. Up to 16 per cent of the male population of the Loyalties were employed away from their home islands during this period (Howe 1977: 90). The Bislama

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

spoken by the Loyalty Islanders was very much the same as that spoken in Vanuatu at the time, as the following example shows: HI think God He savey lrUlke plenty things. He clever fellow, He no same black fellow belong Caledonia". (Anderson 1880: 157). Bislama was widely spoken by Loyalty Islanders right up until the end of the nineteenth century and beyond, although after the 1880s, it underwent a dramatic shift in functional status, according to Crowley (1990: 75), probably in the face of French. However, the fact that it was still well-known at the end of the nineteenth century is attested by the following remarks by Daville (1901: 166): "lIs ont fait... une sort d'idiome baroque, communement appele bichelamare, sorte de langue sabir, dans laquelle il y a surtout de l' anglais, beaucoup de mots franc;ais et quelques expressions canaques". 7.6. The Solomon Islands The whaling trade began in the Solomons in the early 1820s, carried on by fleets of British, French and American ships. Activity centred on Bougainville, New Georgia and Malaita and the waters further to the east. Corris (1973: 7) reports that by the 1860s, when the whaling grounds were played out, whalers had visited every island in the Solomons. The whalers mostly avoided putting in to land in the Solomons, most captains preferring to trade for provisions with those islanders who were prepared to venture out to the ships in canoes. There were a few well-known anchorages, however, for example Mono or Treasury Island in the Shortlands, and Makira Bay on San Cristobal. Here ships were careened, repairs carried out and provisions taken on. The frequent visits of the whalers resulted in sustained trading, pigs, vegetables and fish for metal goods, cloth and tobacco. Often, however, relations between the whalers and the islanders were not good. In fact in 1860, both at Mono and on Santa Isabel, the islanders attacked visiting ships and set fire to them, such was their thirst for European goods. The Solomon Islanders, then, did not generally have very close contact with the whaling

481

industry. A few did become acquainted with the cash economy by working as crewmen aboard whaling ships. They should have acquired the South Seas Jargon, working mostly in the vicinity of their own islands, although a few are known to have travelled to Australia. These same people later acted as guides and interpreters for visiting Europeans. The sea-slug or trepang beds in the Solomons were rich, and the industry flourished, especially in the western Solomons, around New Georgia, Kolombangara and Simbo, as well as the islands in the far south-east, Sikiana and Vanikoro. European concentration on these islands both for whaling and for trepang, where considerable contact with the islanders was required, meant that soon there was a cadre of islanders with a considerable experience of these fair-skinned foreigners. Pearl and tortoise shell were also keenly sought after. Andrew Cheyne, a trader of the 1840s, remarked that: They can nearly all speak more or less broken English, which they have picked up through their intercourse with whale ships, who often visit them to get supplies of cocoa-nuts and pigs, of which a plentiful supply can at all times be procured. (Cheyne 1852: 53). Another group of Europeans who visited the Solomons at this period were the Roman Catholic mission, whose stay lasted only from 1845-1848 after the killing of Bishop Epalle on Santa Isabel in 1845, and the hostility of the islanders combined with malaria caused the mission to be abandoned until nearly the end of the century. The Anglican mission suffered disappointments too. Beginning in the early 1850s they recruited Solomon Islander novices and took them to New Zealand or Norfolk Island for training, hoping that they would convert their own communities on their return. In most cases their hopes were disappointed. As Corris reports: "Explorers, whalers, traders and missionaries, there was a sameness about their visits; they did not stay long and they left on the ships which brought them'. (1973: 12).

482

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Muhlhiiusler, Philip Baker

In contrast to this transient population, there were some European residents-beachcombers, deserters and castaways-who made their home in the Solomons. There are records of a Lascar on Malaita in the late 1820s, the only survivor of a British brig. Others were left on shore in the seaslug trade, collecting trepang and tortoise shell, on Simbo in the west, and on Ontong Java. Another island to receive visitors was Guadalcanal. However, it was San Cristobal which was the most important centre of beachcombing activity. By 1860 a dozen or more Europeans had spent time on San Cristobal (Corris 1973: 14). However, European penetration of the Solomons in the fifty years before the arrival of the first labour recruiters in 1870 had been intennittent, selective and tentative. In the western islands, Santa Isabel, Gela and the Polynesian outliers, and of course San Cristobal, there had been a steady trickle. In most places, however, especially the heavily populated islands of Malaita and Guadalcanal few islanders had seen Europeans at close quarters. All this was going to change dramatically with the move of the labour recruiters from Vanuatu to the Solomons for the first time in 1870. Between 1870 and 1911 over 30,000 Solomon Islanders were recruited for three-year terms to work on the plantations of Fiji and Queensland, the majority coming from Malaita, Makira and Guadalcanal. The first ship from Fiji to recruit in the Solomons was the Kestrel, which returned to Levuka in 1870 with 162 Solomon Islanders aboard. It was at the end of the same year that Queensland ships entered the Solomons, the first Solomon Islander recruits arriving in Brisbane aboard the Woodlark in January 1871. The recruiters faced many difficulties, not the least of which was communicating with the recruits and explaining the terms of their engagement. Corris estimates that: Except at Makira Bay, the Polynesian outliers, Gela and perhaps Mono, Europeans could only have communicated with the islanders through signs. The first recruiters do not seem to have taken interpreters from

these places (where there had been earlier contact with whalers and trepang fishermen) to aid them on other islands, and even if they had done so such interpreters would have been of little use in the face of the multiplicity of languages spoken in the group. (Corris 1973: 25). However, the recruiters began to concentrate their efforts on the lagoons, especially those around Malaita after 1875. This paid handsome dividends for the thorough acquaintance with recruiting gained by these salt-water people made them valuable allies in later years when the recruiters' energies were devoted to attracting people form the adjacent mainland. By the end of the 1880s most of the recruits for both Fiji and Queensland were bushmen. All in all, over 30,000 Solomon Islanders were recruited, as follows: 1. Solomon Islanders in Fiji 1870-1911: 8,228 (Siegel 1985:46) 2. Solomon Islanders in Queensland 1871-1904: 18,217 (Price/Baker 1976: 11 0-111) 3. Solomon Islanders in New Caledonia: c. 1,000 [details unknown] (Corris 1973: 150.) 4. Melanesians in Samoa 1878-1913: c. 10,000 (Firth 1973: 309). This number is made up of recruits from Vanuatu, the Solomons and the Bismarck Archipelago, of whom nearly half were Solomon Islanders. 5. Reunion: 14 (Shineberg 1985: 45) Once overseas recruiting ceased in 1911, there was a huge internal recruitment drive with the establishment of plantations within the Solomons. Between 1913-1940 there were over 37,000 Solomon Islanders employed as plantation labour in the Solomons. Very few recruits worked on their home islands, as was the case in Vanuatu also. This, coupled with the fact that teams of labourers in Queensland were usually of differing language backgrounds, was an ideal scenario for firstly the development of Solomons Pidgin on the canefields and then its complete stabilisation and development on the plantations back home.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

7.7. New Guinea Tok Pisin (TP) Together with Cameroons Pidgin English and Bislamar, TP represents the class of expanded pidgins, i.e. pidgin languages that have grown into fully fledged languages without having any significant numbers of native speakers. It is this aspect of the language which offers the most rewarding prospects for sociolinguistic research. The expansion of NGP can be regarded as proceeding through a number of stages, each being characterized by certain social and linguistic developments. The five main stages that can be distinguished are (a) the jargon stage (b) the stabilization stage (c) the expansion stage (d) the creolization stage (e) the post-pidgin or post-creole stage. Only the first two stages of development were reached in the 19th century. For later developments, the reader is referred to the article on English-derived contact languages in the 20th century in this volume. Little is known about the jargons in the New Guinea area. The area of New Guinea and the Bismarck Sea featured only marginally as a contact area with the possible exception of New Ireland which was situated on the shipping route from Australia to China. As early as 1840, some New Irelanders could speak a little English (Valentine 1958: 74 fn.2). However, such contacts were relatively infrequent and of no importance outside this very restricted early contact area. Next to trade, mission work in the Bismarck Archipelago led to the occasional use of broken English. For instance, mission work in the Duke of Yorks began in the early 1870s. It was carried out under the auspices of the Methodist Missionary Society by the Rev. Brown and a number of Samoan and Fijian missionaries. We have been informed (Hank Nelson, personal communication) that the first sermon in Pidgin English was preached in 1875. A full history of the early mission contacts, but unfortunately, very

483

few remarks on Pidgin English, can be found in Brown's autobiography (Brown 1908). The development of a distinct variety of Pacific Pidgin English in the Bismarck Archipelago is related to (a) the special relationship between this area and Samoa, and (b) the establishment of a German Protectorate over the Bismarck Archipelago and North Eastern New Guinea in 1884. Contacts between the Bismarck Archipelago and Samoa, in particular the continued recruiting of labour for plantations in Samoa, meant that significant numbers of New Guineans became exposed to a specifically Samoan variety of Pacific Pidgin English. The declaration of a German protectorate resulted in the severing of the tender links between Tok Pisin (TP) and other varieties of Pacific Pidgin English. A further consequence was the virtual withdrawal of English as a target language for its future linguistic development. Apart from laying the foundations for a separate development of TP, the presence of the German colonial administration provided numerous stimuli for the functional and geographical expansion of this language. Of particular importance is the establishment of a local plantation economy on the Gazelle Peninsula of New Britain from 1879. Significantly, the owner of the very first plantation, the trader Farrell, employed about 150 labourers from Buka and Bougainville who had formerly worked in Samoa. They were employed on the first Farrell plantation at Ralum. Samoan and European expatriates working for the Farrell company used Pidgin English to communicate with these workers and in their dealings with the local population of the Duke of Yorks. The social as well as the linguistic history of early Tok Pisin has been documented in much detail in Miihlhausler (1979) and WurmMiihlhausler (1985). 7.8. Kiribati Although the numbers drawn from Micronesia for work as plantation labour were not nearly as great

484

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Milhlhausler, Philip Baker

as for Melanesia, they were still quite significant in terms of percentage and impact on individual communities. From the beginning of the recruiting period in the early 1860s until the end of the nineteenth century there were 9,400 I-Kiribati (as the people of Kiribati are known) who were recruitedto work on plantations in Fiji, Samoa, Queens-land, Tahiti, as well as Guatemala in Central America, and Reunion in the Indian Ocean. The first European recruiters, however, were whalers who were working the waters around Kiribati as early as the 1820s. There was no real extended contact between the whalers and the local communities except in the southern part of the archipelago, where whales were more plentiful. Whaling captains recruited ship's crew in the southern islands of Kiribati, but perhaps not more than 100 over a thirty year period. These were what Macdonald (1982) terms the first participants in a labour trade that was to become a dominant feature in the life of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands.

1847 1857 1863 1867-85 1867-95 1868-95 1890-92 1894-95

22 51 312 2054 2558 2398 1100 166

In 1847 22 I-Kiribati were recruited to work on sheep and cattle stations in New South Wales. A further 51 were sent to Reunion ten years later and in 1863 Kiribati became involved in the Peruvian slave trade, with 312 I-Kiribati deceitfully recruited for this purpose. Very few of them were ever to see their homes again. In the 1870s drought and warfare plagued Kiribati, making recruiting a very attractive proposition as a means of escape. Munro-Bedford report that during the last thirty-five years of the nineteenth century Kiribati was a significant source of labour for the expanding plantation system in the Pacific. (1990: 173). Recruiting for employment in Tahiti (18671885), Samoa (1867-1895), Fiji (1868-1895), Hawaii (1877-1887), Central America (18901892) and Queensland (1895) involved almost 10,000 I-Kiribati and resulted in a constant circulation of labour, so much so that the 1Kiribati could be considered the most active labour migrants in the nineteenth century on a per capita basis. Recruiting statistics for Kiribati are as follows:

New South Wales Reunion Peru Tahiti Samoa Fiji Guatemala Queensland

8. The special case of PitcairneselNorfolkese The status of Pitcairnese-Norfolk as a pidgin has been the subject of debate for many years. Most recently Laycock (1989) has suggested that the Norfolk variety of this speech variety is most similar to a 'cant'. The history of PitcairneseNorfolk points up some of the problems in reaching a satisfactory statement about its classi fication and status. Today, Pitcairn is Britain's last remaining colony in the South Pacific (Kallgard 1993). It has a resident population of ony 70 inhabitants, the descendants of the famous Bounty mutineers

[Howe 1978: 30] [Shineberg 1985: 45] [Maude 1981: 188] [Delbos 1987: 72] [Firth 1973: 309] [Siegel 1985: 46] [Macdonald 1982: 57] [Munro 1982: 271].

of 1789 and their Polynesian women and companions. The lexicon of the language is of mixed English and Polynesian origin. Pitcairnese developed from the interaction of speakers of a number of English dialects and Tahitian, the languages of the original settlers in 1790. Kallgard (1993) records that the mutineers who chose to stay behind in Tahiti after the mutiny became more or less fluent in Tahitian, unlike their fellow crewmen. Only three of the original mutineers were educated, namely Fletcher Christian, Edward Young and William Brown. It is likely then that the English spoken by the group

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

was rather rough, flavoured with nautical slang. Also of significance was the fact that all of the Polynesian men who were members of the original party which settled Pitcairn were put to death within a few years of their arrival. The Polynesian women never mastered English, although their children did. Throughout the island's history there has been a kind of bilingualism, whereby alongside the emerging speech variety peculiar to Pitcairn (and later Norfolk) there existed a more or less standardised English, kept alive and used as an official language for religious meetings and official functions involving outsiders. Thus most islanders did and still do have two speech varieties or registers at their command. Early visitors reported that the Pitcairners spoke "good English" alongside a simplified register. Hugh Carleton, who spent three weeks on the island in 1850 describes the situation in the following terms: "The language of conversation among themselves is fast degenerating into a dialect. They can speak English, when they take the trouble, with remarkable purity, but with a formality of expression which shows it to have been acquired from books". (Ross-Moverley 1964: 120) The population of Pitcairn moved to Norfolk Island in 1856, and the bulk of the Pitcairners and their descendants remain there to this day, still speaking what they term "Norfolk". Some families returned to Pitcairn in 1859 and several more in 1864. At that time the population on Pitcairn was even more isolated than before, with the end of the whaling era. However, an American influence, noted earlier and attributed in large part to constant visits from American whalers, was reinforced in 1890 with the conversion of the population to Seventh Day Adventism. The status of Pitcairnese-Norfolk has remained essentially constant through this century. Nicoll (1909) after his visit in 1903 wrote: "All the inhabitants of Pitcairn can speak perfect English, but when speaking among

485

themselves they cannot easily be understood by a stranger, as they then clip their words, sounding only the first and last letters. Why they do this it is difficult to say. When questioned, they replied that they were talking their 'own language', adding that this language only differed from English in the above mentioned particular". (1909: 214) Pitcairnese and Norfolk do not appear to have diverged significantly since the original move to Norfolk in 1856 and the subsequent move back to Pitcairn by part of the population. Pitcairnese is described in some detail in Ross & Moverley (1964), and more recently by Kallgard (1993); the Norfolk variety is most recently documented in Buffett and Laycock (1988). 9. Chinese Pidgin English 9.1. Background Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) is of very considerable sociolinguistic and historical interest. Whereas the study of pidgin languages in general addresses the problems of how people who do not share a common language com-municate with one another, such encounters typically occur in asymmetrical power situations and tend to involve a 'high' and a 'low' culture. CPE untypically results from the encounter between two 'high' cultures whose members, whilst willing to engage in mutually beneficial trade relations, were very reluctant to extend these to cultural and other nonmaterial ex-changes. Moreover, the usual oral mode of transmission of a pidgin appears to have been supplemented, especially among the Chinese, with learning from written sources. Another aspect of CPE which has hitherto received insufficient attention is its change in linguistic nature. Such linguistic developments are indicative of changes in the social relations between the groups using this language. Finally, CPE is the oldest form of Pidgin English in the Pacific, and, moreover, one which has occupied an important model role in the development of other varieties, as has been demonstrated in the texts on linguistic diffusion of Pidgin English. Reinecke (1937: 772) wrote that

486

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Muhlhiiusler, Philip Baker

CPE 'is in point of age probably the first of the English jargons, and its name, "pidgin", has come to be applied to broken dialects generally. One might therefore expect the literature on it to be extensive and valuable, but this unfortunately is not the case.' With the important exception of Hall (1944), this observation continued to hold true until quite recently. However, with the successive publication of Bauer (1974, 1975), Franklin (1979), Bisang (1985) and Baker (1987), together with Shi's (1986) MA thesis, CPE has belatedly begun to attract the attention it deserves. The American author Charles Leland probably did more than anyone else to draw attention to the existence of CPE by publishing his PidginEnglish Sing-Song. However, it is now known that he never visited China and wrote the book in London drawing his information from secondary sources (Baker 1987: 200, note 1). In fact, unaware that CPE had evolved during its already considerable history, Leland mixed features from different periods, overgeneralised others attested only sporadically, and violated existing rules of phonology and word formation for Englishderived vocabulary. Another American, William C. Hunter arrived in Canton in 1825 at the age of twelve where he was to spend most of his life until he went back to the USA in 1869 or 1870. There he wrote two books about his experiences in China relating particularly to the period before 1842. De Vargas (1939) shows that they contain many, but mainly minor, inaccuracies, attributable to his having relied on his own memory and not on diaries or records written at the time. His books nevertheless give an authentic picture of the life of a foreign trader in Canton and thus of the circumstances in which CPE was used. 9.2. Sociohistorical context Anglophones were numerically dominant among foreign traders visiting Canton from the early 18th century. As their ships approached the Bocca Tigris, they would take a Chinese pilot on board, often in the vicinity of Macao. From there they would proceed to Whampoa, some 20 kilometres south of Canton, where goods would be

transferred to smaller Chinese vessels and only the supercargo would normally be allowed to continue the journey to Canton with the goods. There their movements were circumscribed and they appear to have had little opportunity for meeting Chinese people other than the Hong merchants, an interpreter and servants. Shi (1986: 27) states that there were never more than 20 supercargoes in Canton in anyone year in the 18th century and most of them never returned to Canton again. Thus continuity in the verbal con-tacts between Chinese and non-Chinese at Canton lay mainly with a small number of Chinese. Most accounts of visits to China in the 18th century are, predictably, written by supercargoes and we are thus far less well informed about the situation at Whampoa where the ship's crews remained while business was transacted at Canton. Anson (1744: 420) .notes that 100 Chinese were employed to carry out repairs to his ship when it visited Whampoa in 1743. More informatively, Nicol (1822) includes in his memoirs an account of his stay of several months at Whampoa in 1787 when he was a comparatively junior member of crew. Of his arrival there, he writes (1822: 97): Soon as we cast anchor, the vessel was surrounded with sampans; every one had some request to make. Tartar girls requests our clothes to wash, barbers to shave the crew, others with fowls to sell; indeed, every necessary we would want. He also noted 'They all spoke less or more English' (1822: 98). Other writers mention being approached by people in small boats begging for food and of their ship being visited by floating brothels at night. Shi (1986: 9) states that foreign seamen were not allowed to set foot in Whampoa. While this may well have been the official Chinese policy, it was certainly not applied to all sailors at all times. Nicol (1822) indicates that he spent a lot of time ashore (in 1787) and there is mention elsewhere of on-shore brawls between foreign sailors and Chinese men. In any case, there was clearly far more contact between anglophones and

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

Chinese at Whampoa than at Canton in the 18th century and we regret that more CPE data from Whampoa has not so far been found. Early in the 19th century, it became possible for some men engaged in trade to reside in Canton on a long-term basis. The presence of foreign women and children in Canton was, however, still not allowed. In consequence, some foreign traders made their homes with their families in Macao and travelled from there to Canton as their business required. We have been unable to find any information about the numbers of anglophones residing in either Canton on Macao at any time in the first half of the 19th century. Our impression from the literature is that the numbers were very small in both places until at least 1820 and that there was a rapid build up from about 1825. Support for this impression is given by the appearance of the first Englishlanguage weekly newspaper in Canton in 1827 (The Canton Register), to be joined by at least two others within eight years. Foreign residents in Macao and Canton created a demand for servants able to communicate with them. To assist with this, a remarkable booklet (Anon. c.a. 1835) was produced which has been described by Williams (1837) and Hunter (1882). It is a small glossary which contains 372 entries written entirely in Chinese characters but which was able to indicate approximately how CPE equivalents of Chinese words (occasionally phrases) were pronounced. Williams (1837 : 278-9) gives 28 examples, but in his own romanised transcription only, without Chinese characters, including: (a) To sell is expressed by say-lum, or sell'um. (b) To want by kah-le, probably derived from the Portuguese querer. (c) Unclean is tah-te, or dirty. (d) To call is kah-lum, or call 'em. (e) Occupied is hap-pe-chun, or have pidgeon or business. Williams (1837: 279) comments: "These are enough to show why the Chinese speak barbarous English as they do".

487

This raises the question of whether the pronunciations indicated were merely the best approximations available within this system, or whether, once the booklet had been widely circulated, they may have led to words being pronounced in precisely the way indicated, a seemingly unprecedented kind of 'spelling pronunciation'. Whatever the case, it seems clear that the booklet found a ready market. According to Hunter (1882: 64), writing of the period 18251842: "This pamphlet, costing a penny or two, was continually in the hands of servants, coolies, and shopkeepers. The author was a Chinaman, whose ingenuity should immortalise him." At the conclusion of the Opium War in 1842, Hong Kong was ceded to the British and five Chinese ports were opened up to foreign trade: Canton, Amoy, Foochow, Ningpo and Shanghai. (Other ports, notably Tientsin, were added to this list in 1860). Hong Kong rapidly took over much of the trade formerly transacted at Canton and it seems likely that most British traders formerly resident in Macao or Canton moved there together with many new emigrants from Britain. Of the treaty ports, it was particularly Shanghai (and later Tientsin) which attracted western businessmen. Thus CPE was no longer largely confined to the Canton area. To the extent that businessmen travelled from one port to another accompanied by servants, this may have brought the latter into contact with speakers of mutually unintelligible varieties of Chinese and provided CPE with an additional useful role. However, it was probably not until substantial numbers of non-Cantonese speaking Chinese emigrated to Hong Kong in the middle of the 20th century that CPE could be said to have played an important role in providing a means of communication between Chinese of different linguistic backgrounds (cf. Whinnom 1971). Although spoken in a wider range of localities after 1842, the proportion of the Chinese population as a whole which was able to speak CPE must at all times have remained minuscule. It cannot therefore be assumed, without supporting evidence, that the Chinese who settled in many different places throughout the Greater Pacific area from the mid-19th century onwards were

488

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhtiusler, Philip Baker

necessarily CPE-speakers. In the case of the southwestern Pacific, it is particularly important to distinguish between genuine CPE (with perhaps some influence from a local variety of Pacific Pidgin English) and the local Pidgin English as pronounced by people whose first language is a variety of Chinese. A useful start in this direction has recently been made by Siegel (1988) for Nauru. 9.3. Linguistic features A more detailed description has been given by Baker and Miihlhausler (1990) and comments on lexicon and grammar shared with other Pacific Pidgin Englishes are found in the texts dealing with linguistic diffusion. As noted in that introduction, the linguistic character of CPE has changed considerably during its lifecycle, with a particularly noticeable break occurring around the

time of the Opium Wars. Such changes pose a challenge to both universalists and substratists, as pointed out by Baker and Miihlhausler (1990). An illustration of the striking difference between CPE of the 18th and 19th centuries is to be found in the pronoun system. Apart from three attestations of he as the third person singular nonsubject pronoun, all pronouns and possessive adjective forms in the CPE data up to 1800 conform to the rules of 'standard' English. Thereafter, the situation began to change. The changes were most dramatic among the first person singular forms where I, me and my completed as the subject pronoun and me and my as the non-subject pronoun, with my ultimately triumphing in both positions. The details are set out in the following table:

Attestations for first person singular pronouns 1743-1800

Dated 1743-1800 1801-1840 1831-1840 1841-1850 1851-1860 1861-1870 1871-1880

I

13 13(62%) 16(25%) 14(50%) 11 (16%) 6(11 %) 1 (2%)

Subject me 6(29%) 18 (28%) 1 (4%) 2 (3%) 7 (13%) 2 (3%)

my

2 (9%) 30(47%) 13 (46%) 55(81%) 40 (76%) 59 (95%)

Shi (1986: 76) apparently misinterpreting Hall (1944: 97), states that there are only three personal pronouns in CPE-my, you and heand that these are unmarked for number. In fact, my and he are found exclusively as singular pronouns in our data and there are very few examples of you in plural contexts. With regard to other plural pronouns, it is important to appreciate that the majority of our data consists of exchanges between one Chinese and one non-Chinese person and, in such dialogue, we have no examples in which either party refers to both participants by a pronoun. (This lack of an inclusive we probably

Non-Subject me 6 4 2(22%)

my

7(78%) 1 14 5 22

reflects the lack of solidarity between the interlocutors). In the few instances where circumstances required a plural pronoun, English plural pronouns are found. For example in the following sentence (from 1811), the author has defied the prevailing rules and walked into Canton with a view to handing a petition to the chief customs officer (hoppo) in person. He was soon stopped by two 'security merchants' who referred to themselves as 'we': "We takey petition before he know you come city" (Lindsay 1840: 290). Much has been written about the origins of the linguistic similarities between CPE and

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

Portuguese-based creoles (see the contribution on this topic in this volume by Alan Baxter, Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Pacific and Western Pacific Rim). They hypothesis that the grammatical features common to creole languages in both the old and the new world result from relexification i.e. the replacement of the lexicon of a language without changing its grammatical structures, is generally attributed to Thompson (1961) and was subsequently refined by writers such as Stewart (1962) and Whinnom (1971). However, the idea that CPE is the relexification of an earlier Portuguese-based form of speech was proposed more than a century ago. Hunter (1882: 61) writes: CPE was undoubtedly an invention of the Chinese, and long anterior to the appearance of the English at Canton in its origin, as may be proved by the admixture of Portuguese and Indian words still to be found in it, the latter having probably been originally made known by those primary visitors from the western world via India. The English came more than a hundred years after, words from their language were gradually incorporated, and increased with the disappearance of the Portuguese, who confined themselves to their own growing colony of Macao, until finally the former became the principal traders, and thus this language became known as Pigeon-English. Hunter's evidence for this proposal is confined to a short list of CPE words of Portuguese and Indian origin (pp. 61-62). Thompson (1961), Stewart (1962) and Whinnom (1971) were concerned with accounting for grammatical structures shared by creole languages rather than pidgins and, more significantly, with similarities between de-vel oped systems rather than similarities in incipient pidgins. During the course of a detailed discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the relexification hypothesis, Miihlhausler (1986,

489

especially pp. 107-113) makes the point that most writers who support this view (a)

do not consider the possibility that pidgins and creoles based on European languages might themselves be relexifications of pidgins or creoles based on non-European languages; (b) do not draw a proper distinction between the role of relexification in the formation of particular pidgins and creoles and its role in their subsequent history; and (c) do not consider the possibility of discontinuity in development. So far as (a) is concerned, the Portuguese very much followed in the wake of the Arabs in establishing trading posts from India to China; they even employed Arab pilots, as was indicated by Pinto in 1614 (Pinto 1960: 33). However, in the absence of any known evidence, this is not the place to speculate on the possibility that the Portuguese-based creoles currently or formerly spoken in at least 15 localities from Diu to Hong Kong (Ferraz 1987: 338) may owe something to an earlier Arabic-based form of speech. With regard to (b) and (c), we need to consider the position of Portuguese-based forms of speech in Canton and Macao in the early part of the 18th century when anglophone trading vessels began to dominate foreign trade with China (although several other European nations, most notably the Dutch and the French, also participated). The Portuguese had by then already occupied Macao for 150 years and it is known that they had taken there, as slaves or otherwise, some people from Africa, India and Malacca. We have not been able to find any accounts of the language situation in Macao at the start of the 18th century but we think it likely that, in addition to some speakers of Metropolitan Portuguese, there would also have been a distinctive language with a predominantly Portuguese-based lexicon spoken by the locallyborn population not of pure Chinese descent (i.e. probably a creole and probably the ancestor of modern Macanese) while the Cantonese Chinese who worked with or for Portuguese-(Creole-) speakers in and around Macao probably also

490

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

spoke pidginized varieties of Portuguese (Creole). However, as the Portuguese traded with the Chinese at Macao and not at Canton, it is not apparent that there would have been PortuguesePidgin-speaking Chinese residents in Canton at the start of the 18th century. Possibly the first published account of a visit to Macao and Canton to make reference to pidginised speech is that of Anson (1748). As his ship neared Macao in 1972, 'a Chinese pilot put on board us, and told us, in broken Ponuguese, he could carry us (sic!) to Macao for thirty dollars' (1748:467). Later, at Macao, he cites the words of a 'Chinese linguist' describing this as 'his broken jargon' (1748: 524). The words themselves, given as example, include nothing of obvious Portuguese derivation. A few years later, in 1747-48, Noble visited Canton where he noted that " ... there are few of the merchants but have a person who can speak broken English and Portuguese. So that French, Dutch and Danes, are obliged to speak either the one or the other when they traffick with them' (1762: 210). Later he writes 'I sometimes asked my Chinese acquaintances, what they ["Armenians"] were: they gave me many answers in broken and mixed dialect of English and Portuguese, which I could not understand' (1762: 245), and 'The dialect that Chinese use in common with us, is a mixture of European languages, but mostly, as we formerly hinted, of English and Portuguese, together with some words of their own' (1762: 262-263). Early in the 19th century, a second opportunity for Pidgin Portuguese to influence CPE arose as some European merchants settled in Macao with their families. This must have created a local demand for servants who could communicate with anglophones and most of these who obtained such employment probably already spoken some Pidgin Portuguese. In this connection we should mention the possibility that some relexification occurred as a consequence of the fact that CPE was learnt from chap-books rather than in direct face-to-face interaction. Williams (1837: 279) suspects that the 16 page chapbook we have discussed earlier was 'probably the product of the same hand' as that of a much more extensive (34 page) Portuguese

chapbook. He adds that the author 'knew much less of English than he did of Portuguese' calquing of (pidgin) Portuguese may have been likely strategy. To sum up: (a)

Noble (1762) and Toreen (1771) provide the only persuasive evidence yet to come to light that some speakers of Portuguese pidgin in the 18th century incorporated English words into CPE in order to communicate with anglophones; (b) the extent to which early CPE results from the relexification of Pidgin Portuguese cannot be assessed unless or until 18th century and preferably pre-1750 texts of the latter are found. (c) While the opportunity for Macao Pidgin Portuguese to have influenced CPE in the first half of the 19th century does not appear to be reflected more than marginally in CPE's lexicon, the possibility that MPP may have played some role in some of the rapid changes which took place in CPE in that period should not be dismissed. But this can only be determined if and when MPP data of that period come to light. 9.4. Outlook The amount of linguistic and sociohistorical information on CPE has increased dramatically in recent years and it is hoped that a more comprehensive account of this language (Baker, now in preparation), will become available before too long.

10. Conclusions The 19th century was a time of very considerable upheaval in the Pacific area. Most significant, for the purposes of this chapter, is the extensive disruption of the traditional language ecology of the area subsequent to the intrusion of powerful European languages, in particular English. Whilst in the initial phases the outcome of such linguistic encounters tended to be very similar (a jargon type of English), developments after the

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

initial encounters preceded along different paths in different parts of the Pacific. The result is that by the end of the 19th century we find a wide typological diversity among the English-derived contact languages: jargons, stable pidgins, cants, special registers and possibly (though not properly documented) extended pidgins and even creoles.

491

The documentation of these languages over the years has been very uneven and a number of major gaps remain, particularly in Micronesia and the varieties spoken by the mixed crews of the ships that operated throughout the Pacific. We hope that the momentum that has developed in the study of Pacific contact languages will continue unabated.

References Adams, R. 1984 In the Land of Strangers: a Century of European Contact with Tanna, 1774-1874. Pacific Research Monograph No.9, The Australian National University, Canberra. Anderson, J.W. 1880 Notes of Travel in Fiji and New Caledonia with some Remarks on South Sea Islanders and their Languages. London: Ellissen & Co. Anon ca. 1835 Hung Maou Tung Yang fan hwa. The common foreign language of the redbristled people. No place, no publisher. Anson, G. 1744 A voyage to the South-Seas, and to many other parts of the world. London: J. Plume. Baessler, Arthur 1895 Siidsee-Bilder. Berlin: Georg Reimer. Baker, Philip 1987 "Historical developments in Chinese Pidgin English and the nature of the relationships between the various pidgin Englishes of the Pacific region", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 2: 163-207. Baker, Philip-Peter Muhlhausler 1990 "From business to Pidgin", Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 1(1): 88-115. Baker, SJ. 1941 New Zealand slang. Christchurch: Whitcombe and Tombs.

Bauer, A. 1974 Das Kanton-Englisch. Bern and Frankfurt: Lang. 1975 Der soziolinguistiche Status und die Funktionsproblematik von Reduktionssprachen. Frankfurt: Lang. Bedford, R. 1971 Mobility in transition: an analysis of population movement in the New Hebrides. Ph.D. thesis, The Australian National University, Canberra. Bingham, H. 1866 Story of the Morning Star, the children's missionary vessel. Boston: American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. Bisang, W. 1985 Das Chinesische Pidgin-Englisch. Zurich: Universitat Zurich. Brown, George 1908 Pioneer missionary and explorer: an autobiography. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Buffett, A.-Donald C. Laycock 1988 Speak Norfolk today. Norfolk Island: Himii Publishing Company. Cheyne, A. 1852 A description of the islands in the western Pacific ocean. London. Churchill, W. 1911 Beach-la-mar: the jargon or trade speech of the western Pacific. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution.

492

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

Clark, Ross 1979 "In search of Bislama", Te Reo 22(23): 3-66. Colvin, S. (ed.) 1911 The letters of Robert Louis Stevenson. Vol 3. London: Methuen. Corris, P. 1973 Passage, port and plantation: a history of Solomon Islands labour migration 18701914. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. Crowley, Terry 1990 Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: the emergence of a national language in Vanuatu. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Damon 1861 Morning Star Papers. Honolulu: Hawaiian Missionary Society. Daville, E. 1901 Guide pratique du Colon en NouvelleCaledonie. Paris: Andre et Cie. David, Mrs E. 1899 Funafuti or three months on a Coral Island. London: John Murray. Delbos, G. 1987 Nous mourons de te voir (Ti mate ni kan moriko). Le Sarment: Fayard. de Vargas, Ph. 1939 "William C. Hunter's books on the old Canton factors". Yenching Journal of Social Studies 2: 91-117. Ferraz, L.1. 1987 "Portuguese creoles of West Africa and Asia", in: G.G. Gilbert (ed.), Pidgin and creole languages. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Firth, S.G. 1973 German recruitment and employment of labourers in the Western Pacific before the First World War. D.Phil. thesis, Oxford University. Franklin, Karl J. 1979 "Some comparisons between Chinese Pidgin English and Melanesian Pidgin English", Yalanya: Journal of the Australian Linguistic Society 6: 40-59.

Gamier, J. 1867 "Voyage ala Nouvelle-Caledonie, 18631866", Tour du Monde 16: 155-208. Goodman, Morris 1985 "Review of Bickerton's Roots of language", International Journal of American Linguistics 51: 109-137. Gulick, L. 1862 "Micronesia", Nautical Magazine, 3 parts, April: 169-82: May: 237-45: June 298308. Hall, Richard A. Jr. 1944 "Chinese Pidgin English grammar and texts", Journal of the American Oriental Society 64: 95-113. 1945 "English loan words in Micronesian languages", Lingua 21: 214-219. 1962 "The life cycle of pidgin languages", Lingua 11: 151-156. Hezel, F. 1983 The first taint of civilization: a history of the Caroline and Marshall Islands in precolonial days, 152 I -I 885. Center for Pacific and Asian Studies, Pacific Islands Monograph Series, No.1. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Hollyman, KJ. 1971 "French in the Pacific", in: Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics, vol. 8: Linguistics in Oceania, 903-937. The Hague: Mouton. 1976 "Les pidgins europeens de la region caledonienne", Te Reo 19: 25-65. 1978 "La langue de relation entre Autochtones et Franr;ais: Ie nord de la Nouvelle-Caledonie avant 1854", Te Reo 21: 35-66. Holm, John 1989 Pidgins and creoles Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Howe, K.R. 1977 The Loyalty Islands: a history of culture contact 1840- I 900. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 1978 "Tourists, sailors and labourers: a survey of early labour recruiting in southern Melanesia", Journal of Pacific History 13(1): 22-35.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

Hunter, W.C.J. 1882 The 'Fan Kwae' at Canton before Treaty Days. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench and Co. Kallgard, A. 1993 "Present-day Pitcairnese", English World-Wide 14(1): 71-114. Keesing, Roger M. 1988 Melanesian pidgin and the Oceanic substrate. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Laycock, Donald C. 1989 "The status of Pitcairn-Norfolk: creole, dialect or cant", in: Ulrich Ammon (ed.), Status and function of languages and language varieties, 606-629. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Lindsay, H. 1840 "An adventure in China", in: 1.J. Robert-H. Lindsay (eds.), Oriental miscellanies. Wigan: C.S. Simms. London, J. 1909 "Beche de Mer English", Contem-porary Review 96: 359-364. Macdonald, B.K. 1982 Cinderellas of the Empire: towards a history of Kiribati and Tuvalu. Canberra: Australian National University Press. McClintock, S.L. 1994 Ethnographic research into the ways of speaking in Micronesia: the Ngatikese Men's Creole; ms. Dept of Linguistics, University of Hawaii. Maude, H.E. 1981 Slavers in paradise: the Peruvian labour trade in Polynesia, 1862-1864. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Melville, H. 1847 Omoo: a narrative of adventures in the South Seas. New York: Harper & Brothers. Moench, R. 1963 Economic relations of the Chinese in the Society Islands. Unpublished Ph.D. theses, Harvard University. Moses, J.A. 1973 "The coolie labour question and German colonial policy in Samoa, 1900-1914", Journal of Pacific History 8: 101-124.

493

Miihlhausler, Peter 1978 "Samoan Plantation Pidgin and the origin of New Guinea Pidgin", Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 1. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-54: 67-119. 1979 Growth and structure of the lexicon of New Guinea pidgin. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-52. 1985 "The number of pidgin Englishes in the Pacific". Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-72: 25-51. 1986 Pidgin and creole linguistics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Munro, D. 1982 The Lagoon Islands: a history of Tuvalu, 1820-1908. Ph.D. thesis, Macquarie University. Munro, D.-R.Bedford 1990 "Labour migration from the atolls: Kiribati and Tuvalu", in: Clive MooreJacqueline Leckie-Doug Munro (eds.), Labour in the South Pacific. Townsville: James Cook University. Nicol, J. 1822 The life and adventures of John Nicol. Edinburgh: William Blackwood. Nicoll, M.J. 1909 Three voyages of a naturalist. London: Witherby. Noble, C.F. 1762 A voyage to the East Indies in 1747 and 1748. London: T. Becket and P.A. Dehondt. Pinto, R.M. 1614 (1960) Peregrinaram (German translation, 1960). Hamburg: Dulk. Poyer, Lin 1992 The Ngatik massacre: history and identity on a Micronesian atoll. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Price, C.-E. Baker 1976 "Origins of Pacific Island labourers in Queensland, 1863-1904: a resaerch note", Journal of Pacific History 11(1-2): 106-121. Reinecke, John E. 1937 Marginal languages: a sociological survey of the creole languages and trade jargons. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University.

494

Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Miihlhiiusler, Philip Baker

Roberts, Julian M. forthcoming "Pidgin Hawaiian: a sociohistorical study", to appear in Journal of Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 56pp. Ross, A.S.C.-A.W. Moverley 1964 The Pitcairnese language. London: Deutsch. Schuchardt, Hugo 1889 "Beitrage zur Kenntnis des englischen Kreolisch II:Melaneso-Englisches", Englische Studien 13: 158-162. Shi, D. 1986 Chinese Pidgin English: its origin and linguistic features. Unpublished M.A. long paper, Department of Linguistics, University of Pittsburgh. Shineberg, D. 1967 They came for sandalwood: a study of the sandalwood trade in the South-west Pacific 1830-1865. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. 1985 "French labour recruiting in the Pacific Islands: an early episode", Journal de la Societe des Oceanistes 40(78): 45-50. Shineberg, D. (ed.) 1971 The trading voyages of Andrew Cheyne 1841-1844. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Siegel, Jeff 1985 "Origins of Pacific Islands labourers in Fiji", Journal of Pacific History 20(1): 42-54. 1988 Pidgin English in Nauru. Paper presented at the International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Auckland. Stewart, W.A. 1962 "Creole languages in the Caribbean", in: F.A. Rice (ed.), Study of the role of second

languages in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Washington: Center of Applied Linguistics for Modem Language Association of America. Thompson, R.W. 1961 "A note on some possible affinities between the creole dialects of the Old World and those of the New", Creole Language Studies 2: 107-113. Toreen, O. 1771 "A voyage to Suratte, China, etc", in: P. Osbeck (ed.), A voyage to China and the East Indies, Volume 2. London: Benjamin White. Valentine, c.A. 1958 An introduction to the history of changing ways of life on the Island of New Britain. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Whinnom, Keith 1971 "Linguistic hybridization and the 'special case' of pidgins and creoles", in: D. Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Williams, S.W. 1837 Gaoumun fan yu tsa tsze tseuen taou, or A complete collection of the miscellaneous words used in the foreign language of Macao. "Hungmaou mae mae tung tung kei hwa, or those words of the devilish language of the red-bristled people commonly used in buying and selling" Chinese Repository 6: 276-279. Wurm, S.A.-Peter Miihlhausler (eds.) 1985 Handbook of Tok Pisin (New Guinea Pidgins). Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-70.

Relevant maps Papua New Guinea Mekeo, Tasmania, Micronesian Pidgin English. Compiled by Alan Jones and Theo Baumann. Map 27.

Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 47.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century

Formation and spread ofTok Pisin 1880-1920. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler. Map 49. Language contacts in the history of Tok Pis in. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler. Map 51. Chinese Pidgin English in the 19th century. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 52.

495

Resettlement and migration in the colonial and post-colonial period. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Map 59.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century (excluding Australia) Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction The same factors that had begun to transform the linguistic ecology of the Pacific region in the 18th and 19th centuries continued to operate in the 20th century, though at a vastly accelerated pace. There are also a number of new pressures, notably the effects of two world wars, the end of colonialism and the emergency of new communication technology. As one approaches the end of the 20th century, one can perceive an ever accelerating transition from multilingualism involving local vernaculars and pidgins to monolingualism, particularly monolingualism in English. This process has taken a number of forms depending on certain social political factors. Speaking very generally, English has become an integral part of the language ecology of the Pacific in a number of different settings including:

TYPE I

TYPE IT

Uninhabited islands which were occupied by English speaking colonisers. In the Pacific these include Pitcairn, Bonin, Norfolk Island and Palmerston. Neo-Europes, i.e. territories where the indigenous population was reduced and marginalised and where European settlers became dominant within a short span of time. The clearest examples are Australia and New Zealand, but Hawaii can also be included in this category.

TYPE III Linguistically diverse or fragmented areas where English was adopted for the purposes of internal communi-

cation in the process of modernisation. Examples include the three Melanesian states, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu as well as Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines. TYPE IV Originally monolingual territories where English became the language of administration and education such as Fiji, Samoa, Guam, Kiribati, Tuvalu and Hong Kong. TYPE V

Monolingual independent countries where English is used for international communication and taught as a second language at high school and universities. Examples include Japan, Korea and Taiwan and more recently Kampuchea.

In all of the above cases, the establishment of English has not been an instantaneous process but was preceded by a more or less prolonged period during which English based pidgins and creoles were in use. Reinecke (1937) has remarked on the close link between frontier conditions and pidginisation. During the nineteenth century, most of the Pacific region was frontier country, from the perspective of English-speaking Euro-peans. The region since has witnessed a dramatic increase in the acceptance of English and other western languages and cultures and the accompanying shift or obsolescence of local languages and cultures (see Miihlhausler forth-coming). How this development has affected the Englishderived contact languages that had developed here during the nineteenth century will now be

498

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

discussed with reference to the just established five types of linguistic acculturation.

Type I The discovery and occupation of uninhabited islands in the Pacific was virtually completed in the 19th Century. In the few locations where English-derived varieties of language had developed these variants came into renewed vigorous contact with outside languages, particularly English, leading to their disappearance, as in the case of Bonin or to a diglossic situation as in the case of Pitcairn and Norfolk. During and following World War II a number of uninhabited Pacific islands were taken over by mainly the U.S. military. Nothing is known about the linguistic consequences of such military developments, though the multinational character of the personnel employed, particularly the involvement of Pacific Islanders from a number of different localities makes it likely that short-lived military varieties of Pidgin English were spoken on a number of military bases in the Pacific.

Type II As regards Type II, the settlement of the NeoEuropes in the Pacific area was essentially completed by the tum of the 20th century and the legal and institutional framework guaranteeing the dominance of English was in place. Pidgin English in Australia and New Zealand in 19th century New Zealand and Australia was a frontier phenomenon and as the frontier of Western colonisation moved, Pidgin English increasingly became marginalised. This development was accelerated, in the case of Australia, by the repatriation of its Pacific Island population between 1903 and 1906 and a restrictive white Australia policy combined with linguistic assimilation. Pidgin and creole varieties of English continued to be used mainly in those areas that were highly multicultural such as parts of Hawaii and the north of Australia, including the culturally mixed settlements for Aboriginal people. In contrast to its earlier function as a language for vertical communication between Europeans and indigenous people the main

function of Pidgin English in Australia today is that of horizontal communication between members of different Aboriginal language groups. Both pidgin and creole varieties of English in the Australian north are spoken side by side. More standard forms of English tend to be used in communication between European outsiders and Aboriginal people. Details are given in the text on Aboriginal English by D. Eades in this volume.

Type III The situation of Type III is the area of the most vigorous development of English-based Pidgins and Creoles. These developments are manifested both qualitatively and qualitatively. As regards numbers, New Guinea Tok Pisin, for instance, increased its speakers from an estimated 15,000 in 1910 to about 2 millions in 1990. Similar numerical increase is also encountered in the Solomons and Vanuatu. An exception is New Caledonia; the Pidgin English spoken on the plantations on the mainland appears to have disappeared around the tum of the century and that of the neighbouring Loyalties seems to have experienced a significant decline from 1920 onward. This was a consequence of French language policies that discouraged the use of languages other than French. Another Pidgin English, that spoken in Papua, appears to have fallen victim to a different language policy, that of the Papuan colonial administration to replace Papuan Pidgin English with Hiri Motu, a process that was complete by the outbreak of World War II. A somewhat different quantative issue is the proportion of European and other expatriate speakers among the total pidgin speaking population. While in the 19th century there were a number of beach communities with high proportions of European speakers, these gave way in the 20th century to more segregated settlements where verbal contact between expatriates and indigenes was reduced. Only a small proportion of those Australians living in New Guinea in the 1960s and 1970s, for instance, were proficient in Tok Pisin. With the increase of the size of plantations and other industries involving Pacific Islanders, face to face

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

contact between Europeans and indigenes decreased. Increasingly indigenous labour was supervised indirectly by indigenous overseers. Finally, the number of long-term expatriate settlers in Melanesia gradually decreased in the 1970s, a process that is continuing in postindependence days in Papua New Guinea, the Solomons and Vanuatu. Together with such quantitative changes a number of qualitative linguistic changes also occurred. Most importantly, the jargons and simple pidgins of the 19th century underwent rapid structural and lexical expansion in the 20th century. This expansion was the result of a. a change in the role of pidgins from plantation languages to languages of wider communication for large parts of Melanesia; b. the decline of the input from the expatriate popUlation; c. urbanisation; d. the use of pidgins as mission lingue franche; e. the effect of the Second World War; f. the introduction of new media such as print, broadcast and television; g. the use of pidgins in economic and political modernisation; h. a shift from a culture-neutral medium of intercommunication to a predominantly Melanesian fonn of language. The expansion of the three main Melanesian pidgins, Tok Pisin, Solomon Pijin and Bislama is nearing its end both geographically and functionally. Today highly sophisticated forms of Pidgin English are spoken in all three territories and have become first or primary languages in most urban settlements. However, even in those areas where forms of Pidgin English are firmly established today, there are signs of their being gradually replaced by Standard English. It is likely that by the year 2000 the majority of speakers of Melanesian languages will have shifted to English as their primary language. Type IV In situations of Type IV stable but rather basic Pidgin English was documented, the best known examples being Chinese Pidgin English of Canton

499

and Hong Kong. However, this Pidgin English neither developed further nor survived. The few remnants of this language we can find today are remembered rather than used actively by the surviving speakers. Pidgin English has disappeared from most of Polynesia and Micronesia, though less stable tourist jargons have reappeared in recent years. English schooling in most parts of the Pacific is widespread and the chance that new stable varieties of Pidgin English will develop is remote. Type V Finally, some brief remarks need to be made about Type V situations. In many Pacific countries, some form of Pacific English is becoming the most popular language for contact with the outside world. With fonnal schooling and constant contacts with native speakers of English, indigenous forms of Pidgin English are unlikely to develop. Exceptions are cases of military pidgin English following foreign military intervention and occupation such as American involvement in Korea and Vietnam. It appears that all modem military pidgins originated in Japan after 1945, rather than developing independently or by processes such as relexification of a former Pidgin French in Vietnam. Military pidgins illustrate the principle that pidgins can come into being fulfilling a certain communicative purpose and disappear once they are no longer needed. American military involvement in South East Asia began with the occupation of Japan in 1945, followed by wars in Korea, Vietnam and Kampuchea. As new American bases get constructed and as new military involvement occurs, new local varieties of military pidgin (Bamboo Pidgin) are likely to arise. As these pidgins are used in a very limited social context for limited periods of time, they are unlikely to grow structurally and lexically beyond basic pidgins. An example of a pidginized fonn of English used in Thailand around American bases in the 1970s is given by Gebhard (1975: 12): Mamason talk, "You have teelaak no sweat." Mamason happy for me, but me

500

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

work suzzy wong mamason me kill me die leo leo. Now mamason don know. I no give mamason money, but buy pant, buy shirt, buy for eat me. Give mamason, mamason know. "Where you get maak maak baat? Where you give me?" I tell I work housea-girl, I work tinii chair maio Translation: My mother says: "You can have a steady boyfriend, no sweat". My mother is happy on my behalf, but if I work as a prostitute she would kill me quickly. Now my mother doesn't know. I do not give money to my mother but buy pants, shirts and food for me. If I give it to my mother she will know. Where do you get lots of money from? Where from do you give it to me? I say I work as a housegirl, I work in a bar, yes.

Brief mention must be made here of the use of Melanesian Pidgin English for military purposes. Both the Allied forces and the Japanese contributed hundreds of thousands of leaflets with Tok Pisin and other Melanesian Pidgin texts in the islands of Melanesia. American and Australian soldiers were trained in Tok Pisin and the language was used in broadcasts during the Japanese occupation of New Guinea and in post war years. Use of Tok Pisin for military purposes appears to be one of the reasons for its change from a master-servant language to a language of solidarity and liberation. In addition to the five most common types described thus far, there are a few minor types that have been identified in various parts of the Pacific. Type VI Languages of the modern labour movement The forced labour movement of the 19th century has given way to voluntary labour mobility involving growing numbers of Pacific Islanders who worked for extended periods of time in New Zealand or other parts of the Pacific rim. Many of them are involved in industries where a simple pidgin English is not sufficient and most of them

have ambitions for upward social mobility. Whilst idiolectal pidginized forms of English are spoken by many of them, it is unlikely that new varieties of Pidgin English will develop in such settings, exceptions being new industrial zones in isolated areas (e.g. fish processing factories) where reduced opportunities for social mobility may lead to development of new forms of Pidgin English. Type VII Mixed pidgins and creoles Whereas in the 19th century a number of pidgins and creoles developed in virtual isolation from one another, the 20th century is characterised by complex contacts between different Pidgin traditions. Particularly important is the situation in the Torres Strait where contact and mixing occurred in repeated waves and, more recently, the convergence of Torres Strait Broken, Kanaka English and Aboriginal Pidgins in Northern Queensland. Another difference between 19th and 20th century pidgins and creoles is that mixing now occurs as a result of official resettlement policies such as the setting up of Bamaga on Cape York Peninsula rather than voluntary and accidental encounters.

Having surveyed the different types of pidgins in the 20th century, we shall now briefly consider a number of individual pidgin languages beginning with those of Melanesia: 2. Pidgins of Melanesia 2.1. Loyalty Pidgin English Once an important representative of the type Melanesian Pidgin English, this variety was already in decline around the turn of the century. When French colonial power asserted itself in the Loyalties, French control meant a reduction in regional mobility and an end to the practice of missionising in English. By 1930 Melanesian Pidgin English was still remembered but not actively used by many of the older men (Nevermann, Personal Communication 1978). Today it appears to have all but disappeared.

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

2.2. Queensland Kanakn Pidgin English By 1900 there was a sizeable number of Pidgin English speakers in Queensland, most of them with a long standing experience of plantation labour. Whilst the number of women in this labour force was relatively low, marriages between speakers of different languages occurred and some creolization had taken place. However, the decision by the Queensland Government to repatriate all Melanesians between 1904 and 1906 led to a very serious reduction to the viability of Kanaka English. It is true that many thousands of the workers remained by obtaining special permissions, moving into other industries, particularly the pearling trade in the Torres Straits or going underground, but they tended to become scattered and many of them merged with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Only in a few small areas did creolization occur. Whilst children acquired Kanaka English as their first language, they rarely used it as adults. By 1930 the language of the remaining Kanakas was Australian English (see DuttonMtihlhausler 1983 and the text on Pidgins and creoles of Queensland by Mtihlhausler in this volume).

2.3. Papuan Pidgin English The conditions for Pidgin English in Papua differed in many ways from those of other British colonies in the Pacific. Whilst Papua was an area of high multilingualism it was infrastructurally very under-developed. Evidence of Pidgin English in the former British Colony of Papua dates back to the 1880s. It was used in many of the small local industries (pearling, beche-de-mer fishing, coconut plantations) set up by expatriates, and like other pidgins served as a temporary language of the indigenous workforce in communication with Europeans (see Mtihlhausler 1978a). Unlike other British Colonies, Papua never served as a major reservoir of labour for plantations elsewhere in the Pacific, nor were there any large-scale industries in the colony that attracted labourers from outside. The language, throughout its existence, remained a local solution

501

to local problems. Papua, unlike some other colonies, was relatively decentralised and was lacking in the sort of infrastructure that would create some feeling of unity. Thus, its Western parts, particularly Kiwai and Daru were oriented towards Torres Straits and Dutch New Guinea, while in the East a separate small local plantation economy and gold mining industry grew up. Port Moresby, the centre of the colony, was not a place that favoured the development of a stable Pidgin English. It is true that the language of indigenes communicating with European settlers was Papuan Pidgin English (PPE) (which Mtihlhausler still managed to record in 1976), but the language of the colonial administrators, the police force and some of the industries had become Police Motu by 1920. A number of Government measures restricted the use of PPE and promoted the use of Police Motu (see Dutton 1985) with the result that the latter gradually took over from PPE as the administration became more widely established. The reasons why PPE never acquired the status of a full stable pidgin included: (a)

continuous presence of speakers of English a lack of internal mobility (c) the low regard that the language was held in by the administration and missions (d) the spread of a new prestigious lingua franca from the colony's capital. (b)

Today only a few remnants of Papuan Pidgin English are remembered by some old men, as Tok Pisin or English are becoming more widely known. Milne Bay English may be a partial continuation of an earlier Pidgin English used on the plantations of the Milne Bay Province. The instability of PPE can be illustrated with two texts. The first one was recorded around 1965 by Laade (1968: 19) on the West Coast facing the Torres Strait. It indicates that at the time this part of Papua was still part of the Torres Strait communication area: "One man come out for fishing, other one stay at home. They think these two feller should come outside (to the shore) but one

502

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

stay back. He stop in garden place, his own garden. When he (the first man) look the reef he see the turtle fast (=copulating turtles) in a dry place (on the reef). He sing out now for his friend, he said, 'Kaimeg (mate): You come quick: got turtle here: We haul him up on top (of the beach).' So that man no answer. Now Wawa outside too. He spear kangaroo (with bow and arrows). He now answer, said, 'Huuuuh.' That man say now: Him come now. Wawa is (a bush spirit) all same proper man, big hell of a man, big face all same giant. He kill man all same fighting-man. "

The second text was recorded by Mtihlhausler in 1976. It is a story told by Eka Kave of Sinaka Settlement outside Port Moresby. Eka had been a domestic servant for many years, and was an old man when the recording was made. "Ai go haus, mekim kaikai nau, mekim twelv klok, orait, kuk, mekim kopti, ai putim tebol, ai got hia fok, spun, naif, mi putim de. Ai go, ai putim sia. Masta i sindaun, hevim kaikai, hevim kaikai, gut, em i go haus, kam bek, 0 wokabaut, i orait. We i go? Ai go we? Ai go de, siksmail 0 (unclear) i tufar, 0 Waigani 0 hamas nem? Ai kam bek hom, mekim haus, slip haus, ivening, inse haus. Orait, sik, inse haus, no wok, no wok ai mekim, ai sik inse haus. "

This type of Pidgin English is no longer in active use. 2.4. Tok Pisin The development of Tok Pisin in the 20th century has been spectacular. From very modest beginnings around the tum of the century this language has grown into a fully developed national language and the mother tongue of a growing number of urban Papuan New Guineans. It is the language of Parliament, newspapers, radio, some educational institutions, most

churches and much of everyday life. The development of Tok Pisin has been dealt with in much detail in Wurm-Mtihlhausler (1986), and, more recently, by Romaine (1992). Summarising their findings briefly we can observe (a)

the continuous growth of the range of functions in which the language is used; (b) a rapid expansion of the domains of discourse in which Tok Pisin features; (c) a gradual increase in lexical and structural complexity; (d) is adoption by a growing number of media; (e) change in status from a colonial working language to one of political debate and national identity. The dramatic development of Tok Pisin in the 20th century is of considerable interest to linguists, sociologists and language planners. It is indeed rare that one gets proper data on the progression of any pidgin language. For the most part one has to rely on guesswork and indirect evidence. Not so for Tok Pisin. Right from the start people have written down observations that are extremely valuable in helping us understand the external fate of this language. In 1880 there were probably no more than a few hundred Papuan New Guineans who had any knowledge of a pidginized type of English. However, with the commercial exploitation of New Britain and the Duke of York Islands from 1873 onwards a dramatic change appears to have taken place. Hernsheim, a trader at Matupit observed that in 1873: "No native understood any European languages. Now (this would be 1883) everybody and particularly children spoke that English in question. I had often heard natives using this jargon and talking about the white man and their matters." By 1890 the number of speakers of Pidgin English in New Guinea was probably around 1,000 located mainly around Rabaul. From there they gradually spread to the new government, mission and plantation settlements on the New Guinea mainland coast. The number of Tok Pisin speakers during German times grew from a few

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

hundred to about 15,000 more than a third of whom had acquired the language in German Samoa. Assuming that the population of German New Guinea was around half a million, this accounts for 3% of the total population. After the First World War, under Australian administration, the plantation labour system was greatly expanded and new industries, in particular gold mining were added to the existing ones. Between 1930 and 1938 the number of black contract labourers rose from around 25,000 to 40,000. Basing his estimates on labour contracts made between 1921 and 1936, Reid (1943: 284) comes to the conclusion that around 85,000 additional workers had acquired Tok Pisin, bringing the total number of speakers to about 100,000 or 1I5th of the population. Because of the disruption during World War II, this number probably did not increase significantly, although after 1945 another spectacular rise in the number of speakers occurred. By 1966 when the first

Male

Language

Female

census was carried out, 530,000 or 36% of the population of Papua New Guinea spoke Tok Pisin. By the time of the next census in 1971, this had risen to 700,000 or 44% of the population. As the census questions have changed, no comparable data are available for the 1980 census, so it is estimated that in excess of 50% of the entire population of Papua New Guinea, including that of Papua which was fonnerly not a Tok Pisin speaking part of the new nation, now speaks Tok Pisin. Before we leave such quantative considerations, let us briefly consider the rise of English. The picture here is similar to the spread of Tok Pisin but occurs much later. Again, we seem to be dealing with an S curve beginning with a very slow increase in the English speakers between 1920 and 1945, a more significant increase up to 1970 and a rather more accelerated one ever since. The statistical information based on Papua New Guinea census bulletins is revealing.

Total

Percentage of total population 10 years and older

English

1971 1966

211,651 130,429

112,115 62,908

323,766 193,337

20.4 13.3

Tok Pisin

1971 1966

469,770 369,855

237,355 161,835

707,125 531,690

44.5 36.5

Hiri Motu

1971 1966

103,016 86,665

47,636 31,910

150,652 118,575

9.5 8.3

In 1966 and 1971 the percentage of the total population ten years and older who could speak English rose from 13.3% to 20.4%. The increase of English is most significant in areas that have been under Colonial control longest such as East New Britain (40%), the Central District of Papua (45 %) or Manus (46%). On the other hand, in the most recently opened up area of the Southern Highlands only 7.1 % of the population claimed to

503

be able to speak English. In one district, Milne Bay district, more speakers use English as their lingua franca than either Tok Pisin or Hiri Motu. This Milne Bay English is dealt with in the text on The English language in the Asia Pacific Region by Jeff Siegel in this volume. When we look at the increase of those who speak English only, we can observe a very moderate change from 2.67% to 3.13% of the

504

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

population between 1966 and 1971. If we consider those who had acquired English in addition to skills in other languages then the picture looks very different. There is a spectacular increase of 7.1 % in only five years and is even more spectacular if we contrast the total of 193,000 in 1966 with that of 323,000 in 1971, i.e. 66% more speakers in five years. In 1971 the national average of those who knew English had reached 20%. It is interesting to compare such data with the knowledge of Tok Pisin. There seems to be some correlation between an increase in English and a decrease in Tok Pisin skiIIs, though it is not a very clear one. Tok Pisin remains the most widely used language of Papua New Guinea. It is spoken by around 50% of its population and still spreading among younger people. A number of text books and language laboratory courses for Tok Pisin are available as are dictionaries and phrase books. Because of the longer period of relative isolation from English in German days, Tok Pisin is the least English of Melanesian Pidgins, and has developed a range of structural and lexical peculiarities, notably borrowings from German and Tolai. Here follow some words borrowed from these languages: From German: 'throw out' rausim « a. raus 'out with you!') 'to pray' beten « a. beten 'pray') 'to miss a goal' popaia « a. vorbei 'missed!') From Tolai: mau liklik

buai

'ripe' 'small' 'betel nut'

With increased contact with Standard English the German and local content in Tok Pisin is beginning to decline. Because Tok Pisin, Bislama and Solomon Pijin are closely related, the languages exhibit a fair degree of mutual intelligibility. Tok Pisin is the most aberrant and thus

the most difficult to learn for others, though Tok Pisin speakers find it easy to acquire varieties such as Solomon Pidgin English or Torres Strait Broken. 2.5. Solomon Pidgin English (Pijin) Like British Papua, the Solomons for a long time were a colonial backwater with very little local development. The number of expatriates were quite small and few attempts were undertaken by the colonising power to impose direct rule. The main use of the Solomons for many years was that of a labour reservoir for plantations elsewhere (notably Queensland and Fiji). As the following figures culled from Moore-Leckie-Munro (1991) illustrate:

Reunion (1857) Queensland (1871-1904) New Caledonia

14 18,217 1,000

Whereas most of these recruits had been returned to the Solomons by 1900, a significant number of Solomon Islanders (8,500) were recruited for work in Fiji between 1896 and 1911. Solomon Pidgin (Pijin) thus developed outside the Solomons, particularly among Solomon Islanders in Queensland and was taken back by returning labourers. Though the competing Pidgin Fijian (see the text on Pidgin Fijian and Pidgin Hindustani in Fiji by Jeff Siegel in this volume) was widely spread in the Solomons for a while, predictions that it would end up as the lingua franca of the south-western Pacific turned out to be mistaken. Attempts by the Anglican Mission to make the Banks language Mota its lingua franca and indirectly the lingua franca of the Solomons also failed. From the tum of the century on Pijin rapidly spread internally, promoted by the expanding internal plantation system where it was used as the working language. Between 1913 and 1914 (a period for which reliable data are available) about 30,000 recruits were employed on plantations inside the Solomons. Its importance for the consolidation and spread of Pijin is portrayed by Bennet (1979) as follows:

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

Recruiting for Queensland ceased in 1904 and Fiji in 1910. This ended overseas labour migration just when expatriateowned copra plantations in the Solomons were being established. The desire for greater efficiency and increased profits among traders and would-be planters could be realised in the late 1890s as the fledging Protectorate government gradually imposed 'pacification' on the Solomon Islands. Migrant labourers were now employed on the new plantations, usually outside their home islands. These plantations were the nurseries of a stable pidgin with a predominantly Austronesian grammar and English-based vocabulary. The Labour Trade's unstable pidgin provided a basis for the new pidgin, but it evolved, stabilised and spread on the plantations. There, young men from various islands were thrown together in conditions vastly different from village life. The white 'masta' (manager) and the local 'bos-boi' (overseer) normally gave directions in pidgin, so a new recruit had to learn the language quickly in order to stay out of trouble and to communicate with other groups. By the 1930s Pidgin had become a lingua franca in all the main recruiting areas-Malaita, Guada1canal and San Cristobal. No longer were recruiting ships required by law to carry interpreters to explain the contract. The recruiter spoke Pidgin and prospective recruits or their friends answered in the same language. The adoption of Pijin by the South Seas Evangelical Mission, which had developed out of the Queensland Kanaka Mission, further promoted the growth of the language. Moreover, the colonial administration faced with the problem of extensive multilingualism, adopted Pijin as its main working language, a practice reminiscent of that of Papua New Guinea. After World War II, urbanisation, new economic activity and internal migration of whole

505

families rather than individual male workers became powerful factors in the spread of Pijin and by 1950 it was almost universally known in the colony. Like Tok Pisin, Solomon Pijin has remained more widely spoken by men than by women, but this is changing rapidly in the towns where traditional languages are abandoned and Pijin serves as the primary language of the majority of the population. In spite of its undisputed usefulness, the status of Solomon Pijin has remained very low, unlike Tok Pisin and Bislama, and no official support or standardisation and a development of a writing system has been received. It continues to be discouraged as a language of education and there is little literature of any kind in this language. The only public domain where Pijin has become recognised are radio broadcasts. Unlike Tok Pisin and Bislama it has not been legitimised as a national language and the official doctrine of the colony is that English is the language of the Solomons. Jourdan (1990: 175) observes that: Presently, the modern media of culture transmission have invaded the country: videos, movies and popular culture that are coming in from the West and are bombarding the urban scene are predominantly English-speaking. What impact this will have on the urban way of life remains to be seen, as it is still a very new phenomenon. It would be naive, however, not to recognize the potential impact of English and through it of Western culture on the urban population through the encroachment of a popular foreign culture in the Solomons. Such an impact might in the end prove to be more efficient in spreading the knowledge of English in the population than insisting on using English as the medium of education has been so far. For the time being Pijin continues to be the most useful, most widespread language. Moreover, it is closer to the spirit of the local languages than the introduced acrolectal English. However, with the

506

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

rapid English medium expansion in education, growing urbanisation, new communication technology and the total lack of official support, Pijin's future is not guaranteed. As in Papua New Guinea, the traditional Pijin is becoming heavily anglicised and young and educated islanders have widened the gap between a rural and urban variety of this language.

for the continued use and expansion of the language. Between 1908 and 1941 about 55,000 Vanuatuans were employed locally. However, regional varieties continue to develop independent of one another, as no large number of Vanuatuans were thrown together for longer periods of time like in the days of overseas plantation labour. This state of affairs continued until the end of World War II, the first real changes occurring in the late 1960s. As Tryon observed (1979: 27):

2.6. Bislama

Bislama, like Tok Pisin and Solomon Pijin today is an expanding and partly creolized pidgin language (about 8-10% of its users speak it as their first language). Unlike the other two varieties, it appears to be spoken in a number of fairly well defined regional dialects, a heritage of the following factors: (a)

Unlike the Solomon Islanders who worked predominantly in Queensland or Papua New Guineans who went to Samoa, Vanuatuans were employed in a number of plantation areas (Queensland, Samoa, New Caledonia) and thus returned with different traditions of Pidgin English. (b) Regional pidgins developed in several rather than a single urban centre. (c) The land mass of Vanuatu is not divided into a mainland and smaller islands as in Papua New Guinea. (d) Both French and English featured as superimposed metropolitan languages throughout the 20th century.

By the tum of the century, Bislama as observed by Tryon (1979: 13) "could not be said to have passed the jargon stage, if one may place any reliance on the documentary evidence of these times which has survived", such stabilisation that had occurred being restricted to small pockets such as Lamap on Malekula. Archipelago-wide stabilisation was achieved by the end of the first decade of this century, coinciding partly with the return of large numbers of workers from Queensland and Fiji in the first decade of the century. Internal employment created a rationale

In the late 1960s, there was a boom period in the New Hebrides, with many new employment opportunities for New Hebrideans, who soon began to pour into the urban areas, throwing together people from all over the group. At the same time, the information services at the two residences began to publish news sheets with many items written in Bichelamar, and to broadcast service messages in the language. Suddenly, the government agencies discovered that there was a need for a lingua franca so that their policy for development and a government could be explained. At about this time, as politics was emerging as a preoccupation, there was an awareness among some that communication on a national scale was of great importance and for the first time New Hebrideans began writing news sheets and political manifestos in Bislama, the first Bislama published by non-government agencies, used mainly to air grievances against the administrations. At this time too, the New Hebridean Christian Council decided that Bislama was indeed a worthy language for worship and the translation of the full New Testament is now available. The most significant changes in the development of Bislama occurred in the 1970s and 1980s, i.e. the years preceding and immediately following the declaration of independence of Vanuatu in 1980. Thomas (1990: 237) gives the following list of some of these changes:

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

507

music or local culture are all broadcast in Bislama. The transistor radio has ensured that these broadcasts are received throughout the islands, exposing Ni-Vanuatu to an increasingly standardised form of Bislama. The radio has played a key role in transforming the position of earlier years, when Bislama was seldom heard in the villages, and even then only among the men.

(a)

The increased acceptance of Bislama by the churches and the publication of the Nyutestamen long Bislama in 1980; (b) its use as a unifying language of the anticolonial forces; (c) its acceptance by the lower ranks of the administration.

Thomas adds (1990: 239) that its wide use in broadcasting has probably been the most important factor:

The constitution of Vanuatu declares that Bislama is the national language, whilst Bislama, English, and French are recognised as official languages, i.e. languages of education and public discourse. Vanuatu thus is the only Pacific country in whose constitution a Pacific language has a higher status than an introduced European language. This higher status and Bislama's continued symbolic value as the language of national unity, has promoted its expansion into new domains and functions as well as a steady increase in the number of competent speakers. CharpentierTryon (nd. MS) have summarized these changes in the following two tables:

A final, but crucial factor in both the currency and standardisation of Bislama was the opening, in 1966, of Radio Vila. Jointly controlled by the two Residencies, the station accorded equal broadcasting time to Bislama, English and French. This in itself was indicative of an attitudinal change. Party political broadcasts in Bislama were pennitted on the radio before the 1975 elections. Since 1978, Bislama has been the most frequently used language on the station, which was renamed Radio New Hebrides, and became Radio Vanuatuan Independence. Programmes about current affairs, health, agriculture,

Table 1. Language use in Vanuatu pre-1970

European 1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

6. 7.

Orders Political speeches At home Newspapers Radio news Local songs Church hymns

Oral Bislama

*

***

*

*

Vernacular

European

*** **

***

** *

**

Written Bislama

*** **

*

Vernacular

508

Peter Muhlhiiusler and Philip Baker

Table 1. continued 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

14.

Religion Oral tradition Village meetings Letter writing Slogans, advertising Education Foreign communications

***

***

*

***

*** *

***

***

(*)?

(*)

*** (***: considerable use; **: frequent use; *: occasional use)

*

**

***

(*)

***

Table 2. Language use in Vanuatu post 1980

Oral European

1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Orders Political speeches At home Newspapers Radio news Local songs Church hymns Religion Oral tradition Village meetings Letter writing Slogans, advertising

Bislama

Vernacular

European

Written Bislama

Vernacular

** *** *

**

**

*

*** *

**

*

***

**

*

*

*

*

**

*

**

*** **

***

** ***

** **

*

*** ***

*

***

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

509

Table 2. continued 13. 14.

Education Foreign communications

***

***

(*)

*** * (***: considerable use; **: frequent use; *: occasional use) In spite of all official support and acceptance by the Ni-Vanuatuans, many problems remain. Crowley (1989: 130) has commented on some of these: Because of the relatively low status enjoyed by Bislama, which is a result of its early colonial history, users of the language do face certain problems today. History has left Vanuatu with a national language that is un standardised in its written form, and lacking in vocabulary when compared to English and French. By 'unstandardised', I mean that there is no generally accepted norm against uses of the language. That is to say, people often do not know what is 'right' or 'wrong' when they are writing in Bislama. Spellings also tend to vary randomly between 'phonetic' spellings and the 'etymological' spellings, which more closely resemble the spelling of the word in English (or French, if it is a word of French origin). For instance, a written text in Bislama may be found with the word for 'republic' spelt in any of the following ways: ripablik, ripublic, republik, republic, repablique, ripablique, republique, etc. The new vatu banknotes are issued by the 'Central Bank blong Vanuatu', and not the 'Sentrol Bang blong Vanuatu' as others might have spelt it. Also, when borrowed words are accepted into Bislama, speakers face a choice in some cases of two forms of the same word, one derived from English and

***

the other derived from French. For instance, should a new word like 'centimetre' be expressed in Bislama as sentimita, or as sontimet? Speakers face these kinds of problems all the time when writing for the newspaper, the 'Vanuatu Weekly/Hebdomadaire', for instance, speaking over Radio Vanuatu, taking part in parliamentary debates, or making any kind of public speech at all in fact. An additional unresolved problem is the relationship between Bislama and its neighbouring languages Solomon Pijin and Tok Pisin. Some Melanesian leaders have expressed their wish to standardise the three Melanesian pidgins into a single standard variety, at least in its written form. Such standardisation is linguistically feasible (Wurm 1992) and would lead to considerable savings in the long term. Whether it is politically acceptable remains to be seen. 2.7. Some comparative data Before turning to the remaining English-based contact languages of the area, let us illustrate some of the similarities and differences between the three major Melanesian pidgins, with an example of the translation of Mark 1, verses 1-8.

Tok Pisin: GUD NYUS BLONG JISAS KRAES, MAKIRAETEM Jon Baptaes i stap long drae pies, i stap prij.

510

Peter Miihlhtiusler and Philip Baker

1 Hemia gud nyus blong Jisas Kraes, Pikinni blong God. 2 Hem i stat olsem we profet Aesea i raetem bifo, we God i talem se. "Hemia man blong karem tok blong me. Mi mi sanem hem blong hem i go fastaem, ye biaen. Hem bambae i mekemrere 01 rod blong yu. " 3"Wan man i stap singaot long drae pies, i se. 'Yufela i mekemrere rod blong Hae God. We hem i Masta blong yumi. Yufela i stretem 01 smosmol rod blong hem. ,,, 4Ale baien, nao Jon, hem i kamtru long drae pies, i stap baptaesem 01 man mo i stap prij. Hem i talem se 'Yufala i mas tanem tingting blong yufala from 01 sin blong yufala i mas takem baptaes, nao bambae God i takemaot 01 sin blong yufala." 501geta man blong 01 velej long Judia werem olgeta blong Jerusalem oli slap go lesin long hem. Oli stap talemaoi 01 sin blong olgeta, nao Jon i stap baptaesem olgeta long Jodan Reva. 6Jon i no putumflas klos. Kot blong kem oli wokem long hea blong kamel nomo, mo strap blong hem oli wokem long skin blong buluk. Mo kakae blong hem, lokis wetem eg blong sugabag blong bus. 7Hem i talemaoi long olgeta, i se 'Biaen long mi i gat wan man i stap kam we i hae moa long mi. Mi mi no stret, mi no naf blong tekemaoi sandel blong hem. 8Mi mi stap baptaesem yufala long wora, be hem bambae i baptaesem yufala long Tabu Speret. "

Solomon Pijin: GUD NIUS BULONG JISAS KRAIS MAK HEM I RAE1EM 1 Hem nao Gud bulong Jiasa Krais, Pikinini bulong God. 2 Hem i stat olsem

profet 1saia hem i raetem taem God hem i tok olsem long hem: "lu lukim desfala man ia. Mi sendem hem fo talemaot olketa toktok bulong mi. Baebae hem i go fastaem long iu, an baebae hem i kiliarem rod fo iu. 3Long darae pies wea nating hem i gorou long hem wanfala man baebae hem i singaot olsem: 'lufala mas mekem steret olketa rod wea baebae hem i wokabaot long hem!" 4 Bihaen, Jon, man hu hem i baptaesem pipol, hem i kam long wanfala darae pies an hem i pris long olketa pipol olsem: "lufala mas lusim olketa ravis wei an ravis tingting bulong iufala an sensem hat bulong iufala, an iufala mas baptaes, makem God hem i save takemaot sin bulong iufala. " 501keta pipollong distrik bulong Judea an olketa hu i stap long Jerusalem i go aotfo herem Jon. Olketa ia i talemaot olketa sin bulong olketa an Jon hem i baptaesem olketa long riva Jodan. 6 Jon hem i garem ravis kaliko hem i mekem long barava hea bulong kamel, an starap bulong baliko hem i mekem long skin buLong buLuka. Kaikai buLong hem, jiraships an waeL hani nomoa. 7Hem i tok oLsem Long pipol: "Wanfala man baebae hem i kam bihaen Long mi, an hem i bigfaLa man winim mi. Bikoas hem oLsem ia, hem i no fitim mi fo bendaon an tekemaot sandoL buLong hem. 8M i baptaesem iufaLa Long wata, bat desfala man baebae hem i baptaesem iufaLa Long Holi Spirit. "

Bislarna: GUTNIUS MAK I RAITIM Sapta 1 Jon Bilong Baptais em i autim tok. 1DispeLa em i gutnius bilong Jisas Krais, Pikinini Bilong God. 2 DispeLa gutnius em i kamap pastaim oLsem profet Aisaia i raitim:

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

"Harim, mi salim man bUong bringim tok bUong mi, na em i go pastaim long yu. Em bai i redim rot bUong yu. Em bai i redim rot bUong yu. 3 Long graum i no gat man, maus bUong wanpela man i singaout i spik. 'Redim rot bUong Bikpela. Stretim 01 rot bUong en. ' " 4 Jon, man bUong givim baptais, em i kamap long pies i no gat man, me em i telimautim tok long 01 manmeri i mas tanim bel na kisim baptais, no bai God i takewe sin bUong 01. No olgeta Judia na olgeta manmeri bUong Jerusalem 01 i go long Jon. S Na ol i autim sin bUong ol, na Jon i baptaisim 01 long wara Jodan. 6Na Jon i save putim klos 01 i bin wakim long gras bUong kamel, na em i pasim let long bel bUong en. Na em i save kaikai grasop wan tim hani bUong bus. 7Na em i autim tok, i spik, "Wanpela man i kam bihain long mei, na strong bUong em i winim strong bUong mei. Mi no gutpela man inaplong mei sindaun na lusim string bUong su bUong em. 8Mi baptaisim yupela long wara. Tasol em bai i baptaisim yupela long Holi Spirit. "

English THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO SAINT MARK The preaching of John the Baptist. 1The beginning of the Good News about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. 21t is written in the book of the prophet Isaiah: Look, I am going to send my messenger before you; he will prepare your way. 3 A voice cries in the wilderness: Prepare a way for the Lord, make his paths straight. and so it was that 4 John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 All Judaea and all the people of Jerusalem made their way to him, and as

511

they were baptised by him in the river Jordan they confessed their sins. 6John wore a garment of camel-skin, and he lived on locusts and wild honey. 7 In the course of his preaching he said, "Someone is following me, someone who is more powerful than I am, and I am not fit to kneel down and undo the straps of his sandals. 81 have baptised you with water, but he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit." 2.8. New Caledonian Pijin English Between 1867 and 1922, between 10,000 and 13,000 Vanuatuans (New Hebridians) were employed on the plantations and other industries of New Caledonia. It appears that most of these brought with them a variety of Bislama which does not appear to have developed a separate linguistic identify, i.e. separate from that of Vanuatu. It was not passed on to indigenous New Caledonians and workers from other immigrant groups. Today, New Caledonians wishing to communicate with Vanuatuans have to use French or English. The fact that Melanesian Pidgin is no longer spoken in New Caledonia no doubt has contributed to its political distance from these other Melanesian nations. Data of Pidgin English as spoken in New Caledonia are difficult to locate. The following text by Narowa, a Tanna Islander who had worked 3 years in New Caledonia before moving to Queensland is a rare example of a longer piece of discourse (source: Inquest of Death, Queensland State Archives Jus/N/216 (1893): I come from Tanna Island, and I work along Mrs Barton, I stop six months in Queensland. Before, I stop three years in Noumea. I savee one day last week I ride along truck and look out along brake that day. I savee come along truck driver time that day I look out along brake that time plenty boy stop along top of truck cane stop along truck that time when truck come up along house belong to boy some fellow

512

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

he jump off. When boy jump off truck he no stop. Me see two boys stop along first fellow truck. Then see one of those fellow he jump and one fellow he stop. That boy he jump good fellow allright. The other fellow boy he new-chum he no savee very good come down he put foot along ground and truck he catch him boy and break leg belong to him; and two fellow truck he close up capsize. Truck he loaded up too high long cane. Me no see along top very good I no savee which way boy go down along truck no see him go down. I work brake try to stop him truck that time I no can stop him horse go too quick. That fellow day me work along brake make two day me work along him; me see plenty other fellow boy jump off along truck and he no catch him. Suppose me stop long truck and me want to jump off and truck he no go very quick me jump off all right but suppose truck he go quick me think truck he catch me. Suppose me stop first time along horse and me jump off truck he catch me I think. Suppose me stop along truck behind horse and jump off me go all right I think.

2.9. Pidgin English in Fiji As pointed out by Siegel (1982), the Fijian plantations were exceptional among the plantations of the South-West Pacific, in that the working language there was a pidgin form of Fijian rather than a pidgin English. This Pidgin Fijian had spread over wide parts of the SouthWest Pacific in the 1900s, particularly to the Solomon Islands. However, from 1888 onward, one can observe a change in the linguistic situation on the Fijian plantations brought about by the increasing employment of Melanesian labourers who had already worked in Pidgin English speaking plantations, particularly those of Queensland and Samoa. Siegel (1986: 78) provides demographic and sociological information on this group.

As regards the structural and lexical properties of Pidgin English in Fiji, the available evidence does not point to the existence of a variety distinct from those spoken in the Solomons and Vanuatu.

3. Pidgin English in Micronesia Micronesia embraces the Carolines, the Marianas and the Marshall Islands. Whilst nominally a Spanish possession until 1899, traders from many countries, in particular English speaking ones dominated the area from about 1840 and unstable varieties of reduced English were in use throughout the area by 1860. Some writers, e.g. Keesing (1988) suspect that creolization of Pidgin English occurred in some of the larger mixed beach communities such as Kusaie, where new non-traditional societies had grown up but no firm data are available. With the imposition of German control in 1899 the beginning of a vigorous campaign against Pidgin English was set in motion. By the end of German control in 1919 the language had been replaced by German as the most widely used lingua franca. The reasons for the rapid disappearance of Pidgin English in Micronesia appears to have been that its main role was that of vertical communication between locals and English speaking outsiders. Its role in internal intercultural communication on the other hand, was quite restricted. With the substitution of English by German speaking whites, its main raison d'etre thus had gone. The only exception is the highly multilingual workforce of Nauru where a mixed Melanesian Chinese Pidgin English continues to be in use (Siegel 1990). The estimated population of Nauru in 1982 consisted of about 5,000 Nauruans and 3,400 temporary residents, most of whom worked in the phosphate industry or for government. The majority of temporary residents is from either China or the Pacific islands with a very significant number of people from Australia, New Zealand and Britain also residing on Nauru. Pidgin English is used daily in Nauru in a commercial context, mainly in Chinese-run trade stores and restaurants. According to Siegel there are

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

indications that pidginized varieties of English were spoken more widely at the tum of the century when labourers from China and other Pacific islands were brought to Nauru to work in the phosphate mines. The phosphate industry began in 1906. By 1914 there were 500 Chinese

Year

Chinese

1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1942 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958

597 514 486 684 814 822 761 1,051 1,099 1,110 1,105 696 936 933 931 1,092 1,261 1,533 1,512 1,350 194 n.a. 778 1,163 1,370 1,440 1,491 1,411 759 515 552 568 696 732 654

Europeans

119 110 139 114 118 117 115 131 134 147 147 141 165 163 158 179 194 179 171 192 7 n.a. 79 192 247 247 278 274 253 270 291 262 286 373 363

Other Pacific Islanders 266 265 140 31 22 27 21 20 16 16 14 4 13 14 4 4 4 27 44 49 193 17 21 31 97 58 81 131 560 874 846 911 935 1,105 1,133

513

working on Nauru and their number reached 1,533 in 1953. Most of the Chinese come from southern coastal mainland China. The numbers of Nauruans and immigrants for the years 1921-62 are given in the following table (Siegel 1990: 5):

Total immigrants

982 889 765 829 954 966 1,897 1,202 1,249 1,273 1,266 841 1,114 1,110 1,093 1,275 1,459 1,739 1,727 1,591 394 n.a. 878 1,386 1,714 1,745 1,850 1,816 1,572 1,659 1,689 1,741 1,917 2,210 2,150

Naurans

Total population

1,084 1,113 1,164 1,189 1,220 1,251 1,266 1,277 1,365 1,411 1,426 1,475 1,527 1,567 1,603 1,647 1,638 1,661 1,733 1,761 1,848 589 1,369 1,379 1,448 1,524 1,582 1,618 1,672 1,745 1,828 1,935 1,976 2,093 2,158

2,066 2,129 2,067 2,120 2,174 2,217 2,163 2,479 2,614 2,684 1,692 2,316 2,641 2,677 2,696 2,922 3,097 3,400 3,460 3,352 2,242 n.a. 2,247 2,765 3,162 3,269 3,432 3,434 3,244 3,404 3,517 3,676 3,893 4,303 4,308

514

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

Continued from page 513 1959 1960 1961 1962

712 715 712 748

382 380 324 412

974 1,052 1,094 1,173

Present-day Nauruan Pidgin English is a mixture of a Melanesian and Chinese type of Pidgin English. It is probably a merger of two formerly separate traditions. In spite of its low social status it remains a viable, everyday language in Nauru. The phosphate industry on Ocean Island exhibits many similarities with that of Nauru. To what extent a Pidgin English has been used there and what its linguistic properties are, is not known. Here follows an excerpt from texts collected by Siegel in the 1980s. "fiji god, plandi vijibal a, plandi cuken a, plandi rnit... plandi god... plandi cuken bifu kurno a ... rni larki go ... olegita fiji kern, kabrji olegita, plern kern bak, pope kurno oleguta fiji kern dee a. no god nalu rno ... yao fiji no kern a nalu no karkai...no kan karkar... srlip srlip loksi tivi ... wota no nalu a ... wota no kan ... hia wota osten Ira srp kern a... " Translation: "Fiji is good, plenty vegetables, eh, plenty chicken, eh, plenty meat... very good ... plenty chicken, beef, pork, eh? .. .1 want to go there ... Everything comes from Fiji, cabbage and everything comes by plane, papaya, pork, everything comes from Fiji, eh? Nauru is no good, nothing ... If things don't come from Fiji, there's no food in Nauru ... You can't eat ...just sleep and watch TV ... There's no water in Nauru ... no water, you can't do anything ... water comes here by ship Australia, eh ... " Finally, mention must be made of a creolized variety of English alleged to be spoken on Ngatik Island among the male population as a secret language, the result of a massacre of the indigenous males by European beachcombers and adventurers in the 19th century and their subsequent marriage to the native women. Informa-

2,068 2,147 2,130 2,333

2,196 2,328 2,409 2,516

4,264 4,475 4,539 4,849

tion on this language is given in the text on English-derived contact languages in the 19th century by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Between 1919 and the end of World War II most of Micronesia was under Japanese control and the use of English was not encouraged. After 1945, the United States of America administered Micronesia as a UN Trust territory. During this trusteeship, English again became the single most important language of the area and next to formal schooling and the increased use of standard forms, varieties exhibiting ad hoc simplification also emerged. The recent influx of Philippine migrants appears to have enforced the role of a simplified English as the region's lingua franca. The resettlement and relocation of all islanders within Micronesia has also created a situation in which a form of English is needed as a means of intercommunication. Resettlements include (details in Lieber 1977): (a) the movement of South-West Islanders to Palau; (b) the movement from Kapingamarangi to Ponape; (c) the movement from Nukuoro to bigger islands; (d) the relocation of Bikini Islanders; (e) the relocation of Ocean Islanders. To date, the linguistic effects of these population movements as well as those of the setting up of self-contained industries such as fish processing plants employing multinational labour remain unstudied. 4. English-derived contact languages in Polynesia Before European colonization Polynesia was characterised by relative linguistic homogeneity with most Islander groups employing a single language. Intercommunication with speakers of related languages, as shown in the Atlas text on

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication by Peter Mtihlhausler et aI., was achieved by means of a number of communication strategies. The need to develop pidgins for com-munication amongst the local population thus did not arise. It was only after the influx of Europeans from different language backgrounds and their multilingual imported workforce, that the need for pidgins was felt in this part of the Pacific. In most parts of Polynesia Pidgin English had disappeared by the 1900. The once vigorous use among the multinational beach communities of Tahiti and the Marquesas disappeared with the decline of whaling and the formal establishment of French colonial rule over these islands. The setting up of British and American colonies elsewhere in Polynesia also led to the disappearance of Pidgin English. These observations lend support to Whinnom's 1971 proposal that stable pidgins rarely arise in contact between two languages. However, the history of linguistic contact in Polynesia is not particularly well documented and it is quite possible that additional pidgins and creoles will become known once researchers begin to ask the right questions. It is also possible that increased urbanisation, migration and resettlement, may bring into being new pidgins and creoles in towns such as Auckland, Honolulu and Los Angeles. What is known about the situation of Pidgin English in Polynesia to some extent is the result of lucky accidents. There is considerable scope for linguists and socio-linguists to investigate varieties such as: (a) reduced forms of English spoken by Chinese migrants; (b) reduced English in fish processing plants; (c) tourist English. The case of Palmerston Island discussed in a separate text in this volume (Palmerston Island English by Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher) illustrates that other creolised varieties of Pidgin English may well exist in other more remote areas. Because of the great importance of such creoles for the question of innate linguistic structures, it is hoped that more detailed information will become available soon.

515

The following remarks on individual varieties are best read in conjunction with the description of English-derived contact languages in the 19th century by Darrell Tryon, Peter Mtihlhausler and Philip Baker in this volume.

4.1. Samoan Plantation Pidgin English By 1890 German Samoa had a flourishing plantation economy with thousands of New Guinean workers being employed regularly for periods of three to five years. When German control over Samoa ceased in 1919, most of the black workers were repatriated. A group of about 250 was left behind and began to employ Solomon Plantation Pidgin English (SPP) as their main form of intercommunication. However, an epidemic in the 1920s drastically reduced the viability of the newly developing creole society and over the following years its remaining members intermarried with Samoans and adopted Samoan as their main language. A small number of children that had spoken SPP as their first language switched to Samoan and English and when Mtihlhausler interviewed them in 1975 had little recollection of their first language. Labourers shipped from German New Guinea to Samoa, 1900-1912

Year 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912

Recruitments 247 98 384 103 332 201 179 159 204 291 350 348 174

Deaths 54 14 79 29 58 40 31 11 53 44 58 56 7

For further details on this language, see Mtihlhausler (l978b).

516

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

4.2. Hawaiian Pidgin English and Hawaiian Creole The study of English-based pidgins and creoles in Hawaii, more so than any of the other languages discussed in this text, has attracted international attention and figures prominently in a number of linguistic studies. The principal reason in the publication of Bickerton's Roots of Language (1981) which portrays the emergence of Hawaiian Creole as the canonical case of a new language being constructed by children who, in the absence of proper linguistic input, had to rely on their genetically defined 'bioprogram'. Bickerton argues that the Pidgin English spoken in the first decades of this century was impoverished, unstable and highly variable, and that the next generation's creole contained a significant number of structures not found in its predecessor pidgin. Bickerton's claims have been debated at great length (summaries of this debate can be found in Mtihlhausler 1986 and Romaine 1988). The outcome of this debate remains inconclusive for a number of reasons, including: (a)

Insufficient knowledge of the Pidgin English spoken in Hawaii in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Available descriptions such as Bickerton-Odo (1976) are based on text produced by very old speakers and gerontolinguistic reasons of structural instability have not been given proper consideration. (b) If, as Reinecke (1969) asserts, creolization occurred among children attending Englishmedium schools, the role of Standard English input needs to be reassessed. (c) The question of variability in the creole variations remains under-researched. Most importantly, the evidence from comparable instances of creolization discussed in this volume (Tayo of New Caledonia and Unserdeutsch of Rabaul/Papua New Guinea) does not support many of the properties of the bioprogram postulated by Bickerton. Ongoing research by Roberts and other creolists at the University of Hawaii should provide evidence for the above queries in the near future.

An extensive body of writings dealing with the social and educational role of Hawaiian Creole has been summarized (up to 1935) by Reinecke (1969) and for the more recent developments, in Mtihlhausler (forthcoming). It has been hoped that an up-to-date account of Hawaiian Pidgin and Creole English, specially commissioned for this volume, would provide an urgently needed update. For reasons beyond the editors' control, this account had not become available by the deadline for typesetting. 4.3. Pitcairnese and Norfolkese As the origins of PitcairneselNorfolkese lay in the Tahitian-English contact jargon of the 1790s, for most of its linguistic history this language has served as an in-group language rather than one of intercultural communication, if one ignores its functions as a means of communication between Pitcairn Islanders and their descendants living on Norfolk Island. Throughout its history PitcairneselNorfolkese has been in a diglossic relationship with Standard British English. This diglossic relationship is particularly noticeable on Norfolk Island where the original descendants of the Bounty mutineers lived side by side with Australian immigrants and tourists. (See Flint 1964.) According to Laycock (1988, 1990) the linguistic status of PitcairneselNorfolkese is that of a cant, a marker of group identity rather than a fully developed pidgin or creole. Laycock points out that at no point in the history of this language was there a stage when English was not the primary language of the community. Laycock also draws attention to the fact that the language never became creolised in spite of the fact that a sufficiently large group of Pitcairnese-descendant children lived on the island shortly after the tum of this century. PitcairneselNorfolkese continues to be used as an in-group language for those PitcairneselNorfolk Islanders. Its cant character, according to Laycock, derived from the fact that group membership is primary and that linguistic mastery of PitcairneselNorfolkese does not lead to acceptance by the group. Laycock also mentions that group

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

members with insufficient experience of PitcairneselNorfolkese in childhood, can get away with their very much reduced variety thereof. Laycock (1990: 625) observes: However, there are pressures on Norfolk Island for members with close connections with the in-group (by marriage or other association) to speak Pitcairnese/ Norfolkese. Thus, the variety described is not 'Modified Norfolk', but spoken by those members of the in-group who have imperfectly acquired Pitcaimese/ Norfolkese (mostly as a consequence of having grown up in households where PitcairneselNorfolkese was not spoken in their childhood) but who wish to assert their right to membership of the group by the use of the group language, to the extent of which they are capable. The rules for this kind of 'Instant Norfolk' are absurdly simply. First, only two phonological modifications are essential; the replacement of the dipthongs [ei] and [ou] (English gate and home respectively) by [e.]/[i.] and [0]/[u.] (Norfolk giet and hoem, in the Laycock! Buffett orthography). Second, characteristic lexicon (such as salan 'person', naawi 'swim', ama'ula 'clumsy'-less than fifty words) needs to be used with high frequency, along with conversational tags such as daas etl 'that's it!' Thirdly, the speech requires some sprinkling of a few features of PitcairneselNorfolkese syntax, such as the unusual (and probably artificial) benefactive construction that inserts a beneficiary between quantifiers and nouns: giw wan ai glaas a' biya 'give me a glass of beer', and also that PitcairneselNorfolkese pronouns-of which by far the most important is aldan 'us' (that is, the in-group). The case of PitcairneselNorfolkese illustrates the rapid sociolinguistic changes small non-traditional languages can undergo. The origin of this lan-

517

guage as a medium for intercultural communication is no longer in evidence. Instead it has become a medium for avoiding such communication. What goes for the situation on Norfolk Island also goes for Pitcairn Island. Recent fieldwork by Kallgard (1993) confirms that the language is undergoing rapid anglicization and impoverishment' a process that is helped by the threat of further depopulation. Between 1940 and 1980 the number of inhabitants has shrunk from 225 to 70 and the introduction of video and telephones appears to have made the isolation of the island less rather than more acceptable to inhabitants. 5. Chinese Pidgin English In the twentieth century, Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) data are documented from three places along the China coast: Hong Kong, Macao, and Shanghai. PE data attributed to Chinese people living overseas are also available but analysis shows that these are not always directly related to CPE, being instead English or, in some parts of the Pacific, local varieties of PE as imperfectly acquired by first generation immigrants. In addition, there have been many works of popular fiction which include samples of what purports to be CPE but, since their authors rarely had any direct experience of the Far East, they do not provide usable linguistic data. At the start of the present century, there appear to have been three main groups of Chinese who used CPE in Hong Kong, all of whom had little or no formal instruction in English prior to having regular contact with anglophones:

(a)

shopkeepers and others involved in smallscale business; (b) seamen of all kinds (including shore workers); and (c) domestic servants, especially nursemaids (amahs). The situation appears to have changed little up to the Second World War except insofar as growth in the provision of educational facilities may have meant that young people who might have sought

518

Peter Miihlhiiusler and Philip Baker

employment in these areas would increasingly have had some formal instruction in English before being exposed to CPE. This would have affected (a) most and (c) least. The amahs of Hong Kong were mainly and perhaps exclusively born in China. In mainland Cantonese society, it has been the custom for the father to take the final decision regarding a daughter's choice of husband. Where a daughter was unwilling to marry the man chosen for her, she had to vow never to marry and would be banished from the parental home. Thereafter, the possibilities open to her were few. Some joined religious orders but others, it is said, ended up as prostitutes. The existence of two small neighbouring territories under foreign control, Macau and Hong Kong, offered an alternative possibility, domestic service. While the Chinese attitude to foreigners has generally been hostile, and while working for foreigners as servants has been (and remains) considered degrading, for young women banished from their homes and villages, domestic service promised a combination of security and material comfort which they were unlikely to fmd in China. The Japanese occupation of Hong Kong in 1941 led to the internment of all the British and their allies. This meant that, overnight, most of the circumstances in which CPE had been employed since the foundation of the colony had ceased to exist. The amahs and other servants of expatriates no longer had families to serve. Shops and other small businesses lost their expatriate clientele. Mercantile traffic was severely reduced. When the Japanese occupation ended in 1945, most expatriates who had remained in the colony throughout the war left at the earliest opportunity. The great majority never returned. New expatriates were dispatched to replace them but they neither knew CPE, nor saw any reason to learn it. The war had interrupted the flow of potential amahs, but refugees of all kinds began to pour in from China. The population of the colony increased from 600,000 in 1945 to 4 million by 1969. Rapid industrialization soon provided factory jobs on a massive scale. The new expatriates, forming an ever declining proportion of

the total population, began to recruit Englishspeaking servants from the Philippines, a pattern which persists to the present. Shopkeepers might have retained their ability to speak CPE until after the war, but their CPE-speaking clients had by then largely disappeared. Industrialization no doubt greatly increased the potential for employment as seamen in Hong Kong in the immediate post-war era and the use of CPE appears to have survived longer in this domain than any other. But economic progress led to wage rises which in tum led international shipping companies to recruit seamen from elsewhere, notably the Philippines. By the late 1980s, the number of Hong Kong-based people employed as sailors had declined to one tenth of its 1950 level. Scarcely any information appears to have been published on the use of CPE in Shanghai in the 1930s or subsequently. The circumstances there were even less favourable than in Hong Kong because the Japanese wartime occupation was followed but a few years later by the communist expulsion of all foreign business in 1949. A few expatriates who lived in Shanghai either immediately before or after the war, now in their eighties, survive in Hong Kong. Their memories are blurred but conversation with several of them in 1990 suggests that CPE was far less extensively used in Shanghai than in Hong Kong, being largely limited to expatriates born in the Far East and their personal servants. 6. Pidgin and Creoloid English of Singapore and the Philippines It appears that in Singapore, unlike Hong Kong and Canton, no stable Pidgin English developed. Instead, unstable English-based jargons "are used only in what has been called the Transaction Domain between Singaporeans or Malaysians with no or virtually no education in English on the one hand and Europeans on the other, e.g. taxi drivers with tourists, etc." (Platt 1977: 84). As discussed in Platt-Weber (1980), Singaporean English is best seen as a speech continuum ranging from a basilect to a standard acrolectal variety of English. The authors have referred to the basilectal variety as 'creoloid', a

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

name which signals that the linguistic processes characteristic of creolization can also occur in a multilingual setting without the presence of a stable pidgin. Because English is one of the official languages of Singapore and because of its vigorous use in education and the public domain, pidgin and creole varieties of English are likely to disappear as their speakers become better educated and socially more mobile. What goes for Singapore also appears to be valid for the Philippines. 7. Other islands The main reasons for pidgins is the existence of multilingual communication. In Polynesia (see 4. above), such an environment has always been much less in evidence than in Melanesia because of the relatively high linguistic homogeneity. An exception existed for plantation areas such as Hawaii and a number of shorter-lived multinational communities. The need for a pidgin language in modem Polynesia occurred where:

(a)

indigenous vernaculars were relatively strong; (b) teaching of English and other European languages has been relatively unsuccessful; (c) the islands were very isolated with few contacts with the outside world.

Although the possibility that unknown varieties of pidgin and creole English have survived in Polynesia remains a real one, their social importance and status is likely to be very low. 8. Central America The role of pidgin and creole English in the plantation economy of Central America remains underresearched. We have evidence that

519

Caribbean creoles were spoken in Nicaragua (Holm 1989) and Costa Rica (Herzfeld 1980) but we have no information on the working language of the Gilbert Islanders in Guatemala and the linguistic contacts between English-speaking or creole speaking peoples in Central America and the Pacific. 9. Conclusions A number of writers have tried to speculate about the future of Pidgin English in the Pacific, particularly Melanesia, with widely different conclusions. Whilst there is no disagreement that Pidgin English in Polynesia and even in Hawaii is on its way out and about to be replaced by more standard varieties of English, it is not clear what will happen in countries such as Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea. Bislama at present appears to be the strongest of the Melanesian pidgins, followed by Tok Pisin which is threatened by internal divisions and the re-emergence of regional lingue franche with the Solomon Islands Pijin probably most likely to be replaced by Standard English. For a very considerable time to be Pidgin English will remain a fact of life in Melanesia, a fact that needs to be taken into consideration by educationists, politicians, and those who wish to trade in the area. Thus these despised languages may tum out to be a considerable resource, as is only becoming now more apparent. Researchers working on computer translation have begun to investigate the use of pidgins as pivot languages and those designing international auxiliary languages and sub-languages, e.g. language of air traffic control, are beginning to tum their attention to pidgins. One thing seems certain. As long as these languages are perceived to be useful by their users, no political decisions will speed up their disappearance.

References Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) 1988 Status and function of languages and language varieties. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Baldauf, R.B. Jr -A. Luke (eds.) 1990 Language planning and education in Australia and the South Pacific. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

520

Peter Miihliiusler and Philip Baker

Bennet, J.A. 1979 "Solomon Islands Pidgin", in: Wurm (ed.), 64-72. Bickerton, Derek 1981 Roots of language. Ann Arbor: Karoma. Bickerton, Derek-Carol Odo 1976 General phonology and pidgin syntax Vol 1 - Final Report on NSF Grant GS39748, Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Mimeo. Buffet, Alice-Donald.C. Laycock 1988 Speak Norfolk today. Norfolk Island: Himii Publishing. Charpentier, J.M.-Darrell.T. Tryon n.d. The Bislama of Vanuatu, a newly independent republic. MS Canberra, Australian National University. Crewe, William (ed.) 1977 The English language in Singapore. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press. Crowley, Terry 1989 "Language issues and national development in Vanuatu", in: Fodor, I.-c. Hagege (eds.), 111-139. 1991 Beche-la-Mer - to Bislama. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dutton, Thomas 1985 Police Motu: iena sivarai (= its story). Port Moresby: The University of Papua New Guinea Press. Dutton Thomas E.-Peter Miihlhausler 1983 "Queensland Kanaka English", English Worldwide 4(2): 231-263. Edmondson, J.A.-C. Feagin-P. Miihlhausler (eds.) 1990 Development and diversity. Arlington: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Flint, E.H. 1964 Bilingual Interaction between Norfolk Island language and English. Paper read to the Linguistic Circle of Canberra, 20 May, 1964. Fodor, Istvan-Claude Hagege (eds.) 1989 Language reform - history and future. Hamburg: Buske. Gebhard, Jerry G. 1975 Variation in Thai adaptation of English language features: A study of Thai English.

Paper presented at the International Conference on Pidgins and Creoles, Honolulu. Herzfeld, Anita 1980 "Creole and standard languages: contact and conflict", in: Peter Hans Nelde (ed.), Languages in contact and conflict, 83-90. Wiesbaden: Steiner. Holm, John 1989 Pidgins and creoles, vol.II, Cambridge language surveys. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hymes, Dell (ed.) 1971 Pidginization and creolization of languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jourdan, C. 1989 "Solomons Pijin: an unrecognized national language", in: Baldauf-Luke (eds.), 166-182. Kallgard, Studers 1993 "Present-day Pitcairnese", English Worldwide 14(1): 71-144. Keesing, Roger 1988 Melanesian Pidgin and the Oceanic substrate. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Laade, Wolfgang 1969 "Tales from the West Coast of Papua", Archiv fur Volkerkunde 22: 93-111. Laycock, Donald C. 1988 "The status of Pitcairn-Norfolk: creole, dialect or cant", in: Ammon (ed.), 608-629. 1990 "The interpretation of variation in Pitcairn-Norfolk", in: Edmondson-FeaginMiihlhausler (eds.), 621-628. Lieber, M.D. (ed.) 1977 Exiles and migrants in Oceania. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. May, R.J.-H. Nelson 1982 Melanesia: beyond diversity. Canberra: Research School of Pacific Studies. Moore, C.-J. Leckie-D. Munro (eds.) 1991 Labour in the South Pacific. Townsville: James Cook University Press. Miihlhausler, Peter: 1978a "Papuan Pidgin English rediscovered", in: Wurm, S.A.-Lois Carrington (eds.),

English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century

Second International Conference on Austronesian linguistics: proceedings, 13771446. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-61. 1978b "Samoan Plantation Pidgin English and the origin of New Guinea Pidgin English". Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-54: 67-120. 1986 Pidgin and creole linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. forthcoming Linguistic imperialism. London: Routledge. Miihlhausler, Peter-J.A. Bennett-D.T. Tryon 1979 "Some English-based pidgins in the Southwestern Pacific", in: Wurm (ed.), 53-78. Platt, John 1977 "The subvarieties of Singapore English: their sociolectal and functional status", in: Crewe (ed.), 83-95. Platt, John.-H. Weber 1980 English in Singapore and Malaysia. Oxford and Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. Reid, S.W. 1943) The making of modern New Guinea. Philadelphia: The American Philological Society. Reinecke, John E. 1937 Marginal languages. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University. 1969 Language and dialect in Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Romaine, Suzanne 1988 Pidgin and creole languages. Longman: London.

521

1992 Language, education and development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Siegel, Jeff 1982 "Plantation Pidgin Fijian", Oceanic Linguistics 21: 1-72. 1986 "Pidgin English in Fiji", Pacific Studies 9(3): 53-106. 1990 "Pidgin English in Nauru", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 5(2): 157-186. Thomas, Andrew 1990 "Language planning in Vanuatu", m: Baldauf-Luke (eds.). Tryon, Darrell T. 1979 "The language situation in the New Hebrides", in: Wurm (ed.), 11-31. 1982 "The Solomon Islands and Vanuatu: varying responses to diversity", in: MayNelson (eds.), 273-276. Whinnom, Keith 1971 "Linguistic hybridization and the 'special case' of pidgins and creoles", in: Hymes (ed.), 91-115. Wurm, Stephen A. 1992 "Pacific Pidgin Englishes", in Michael Clyne (ed.), Pluricentric languages, 421-436. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wurm, S.A. (ed.) 1979 New Guinea and neighbouring areas: a sociolinguistic laboratory. The Hague: Mouton. Wurm, Stephen A.-Peter Miihlhausler (eds.) 1986 Handbook of Tok Pisin. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-70.

Relevant maps Papua New Guinea Mekeo, Tasmania, Micronesian Pidgin English. Compiled by Alan Jones and Theo Baumann. Map 27. English-based pidgins and creoles in the Pacific area. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Map 46. Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 47.

Developments in English-derived contact languages. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Map 48. Formation and spread of Tok Pisin 1880-1920. Compiled by Peter Miihlausler. Map 49. Development and spread of Tok Pisin 1920 to present. Compiled by Peter Miihlausler. Map 50.

522

Peter Miihltiusler and Philip Baker

Language contacts in the history of Tok Pisin. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler. Map 51.

Resettlement and migration in the colonial and post-colonial period. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Map 59.

Palmerston English Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher The relevant map is listed at the end of this text.

I. Introduction l Palmerston Island is one of the twelve inhabited islands of the Cook Islands in the South Pacific. The surface of the atoll is only 225 hectares and it is located 434 kilometres north-west of the main island, Rarotonga. Excavations prove the existence of some pre-European Polynesian settlement, but when James Cook discovered the island on 16 June 1774, it was uninhabited. In 1862 an Englishman, William Marsters, established his family, by three Polynesian wives, there. He divided his family into three clans, the 'head', the 'middle' and the 'tail', and drew up family laws which forbade members of a clan marrying within the clan. The Marsters family, who speak a local form of English, have remained in occupation of the island (Douglas 1989: 49, my italics). Even a statement as brief as this one is sufficient to alert a linguist interested in contactinduced languages with a short history (pidgins and creoles). The settlement history of Pitcairn Island and the linguistic consequences thereof are well enough known so that the broad parallels seem, a priori, rather obvious. Both Palmers ton and Pitcairn produced in short order a locallybom population living under an English-speaking patriarch/father and whose mothers were Polynesian. In both cases, a new Polynesianinfluenced variety of English became the mother tongue of the community within one generation or so. A comparison of these two languages with N gatikese men's speech and the as yet to be documented Bonin English (both mentioned in this volume) should prove to be of considerable

theoretical interest, as should a comparison with new Englishes on isolated islands elsewhere, such as that spoken on Tristan da Cunha (Zettersten 1969). This paper provides an initial sketch of the English of Palmers ton (PE); no attempt is made here to compare PE with PitcaimIN orfolk English (PN) or other comparable languages. There have been very few visitors to Palmers ton Island, one of the most remote places in the whole of the South Pacific. All of them, without exception, noticed the particular linguistic situation: A visitor from Rarotonga noted that in 1946, the Palmerston people were still using their old form of English and that psychologicallyspeaking, their links with Britain were stronger than those with Rarotonga (Mana Strickland, p.c., 10/06/92). Commander Clark was shipwrecked and spent more than nine months on Palmers ton, from 1954 to 1955. He was an Englishman and he described the differences between PE and his English: Their isolation and the passage of time has produced what might be described as a 'basic basic English' of a quaint character and rustic accent perhaps handed down from old William. Many words and phrases have become corrupted, and some appear to be original, but on the whole their talk is quite easy to follow and I found that provided I used simple words I was understood by them (Clark 1960: 135). PE has changed over the years. According to witnesses, some of its typical features are fading away. Pam Ingram notes:

524 Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher

In 1975 the accent was certainly detectable, but not as distinctive as I suspect it was previously. I recall hearing this language sounded like pidgin English, when I was a child growing up with some Palmers ton Islanders, and it was barely intelligible to me. In Palmers ton now, however, I could understand the people with little difficulty (Ingram 1976: 32). In 1991, there were 49 persons living on Palmerston. Amongst the 56 persons counted on Palmers ton in 1976,41 were born on the island, lion another island of the Cooks and 4 abroad (New Zealand). There were more than 60 Palmerston Islanders living elsewhere in the Cooks and an even higher number of people born in Palmerston is living in New Zealand. Since the beginning of the century, the population has been decreasing: 1902: 115; 1911: 107; 1921: 83; 1945: 65; 1956: 77; 1961: 86; 1976: 56. Today, the island is still divided in three sections. There are 10 households. During my stay in 1992, the official count was 52, but the movement towards Rarotonga and back is so strong that with every boat link the numbers change. The changes in speaker numbers and the changing patterns of contacts with the outside world have left many traces in the language. I have encountered a considerable amount of linguistic variation due to age, knowledge of the outside world, topic and interlocutor. I shall comment on these from time to time in my sketch description but a systematic treatment of this important feature of the language has not been possible.

2. An outline description of Palmerston English 2.1. Phonology No detailed analysis is yet available. The transcription used here makes no phonological claims, and is based broadly on IPA modified in obvious ways in accordance with English orthography (e.g. ch for tS'; y for j). The glottal stop (or glottal restriction which appears as a variant of h and 0) is expressed by': dis 'ausis 'these

houses'. The r is rolled. Sometimes, the combination t + y is pronounced tch. The consonants are mainly notable for a lack of +/- voice contrast, the vowels for a basic 5vowel system in stressed position and a centralized schwa-like V (written a) in unstressed position. There are long and short vowels. Some long vowels derive from loss of postvocalic r, e.g. ma: k 'Marc', others do not. There is contextual and free variation in length. The phonemic status of length has yet to be established.

2.2. Lexicon According to the social history of Palmerston, English and Maori are the main sources of the lexicon. The fields with most Maori words are fishing and foodcrops: pau, shau, posho, akau, re 'ilra 'i, rotea, ma: ma: ringa: different types of parrot fish; kuru: breadfruit, puraka: atoll manioc. The majority of the Maori words in PE stem from the Polynesian languages of Penrhyn (Polynesian name: Tongareva) or Manihiki (Palmerston's neighbours in the Northern Cook and origin of the women of the first generations), but also from Rarotonga. The Palmerston people are proud to speak "the most British English" of the Cook Islands and they try to limit the number of Maori words in everyday life, especially if there is an English equivalent. So they say ararut and not manioc or man iota, the pawpaw is called mamisapal, especially by old people, and the most popular bird of the island Phaeton rubricauda is called bousn bad (bosun bird) instead of the Cook Islands word tavake. Nevertheless, a great number of words of English origin are either historical or dialectal remnants of the first William's speech and frequently they have undergone semantic changes . . smceas m: tu ev a yaan normal expression for 'to have a talk' yonda archaic «English 'yonder') for 'under, over there'

Palmerston English

yu bin yonda de kakanat tri 'you were under the coconut tree' yu gou yonda 'you go over there' tu get de struk 'to fall in love' shi gat da struk afta det boi 'she fell in love with the boy' tu teik a doch 'to take a nap' (from English 'dodge')

There seem to be some interesting examples of "language mix" as well as the reduplication of nouns, verbs and adjectives. Frequently, Cook Islanders from the other parts of the country quote mockingly the following examples: ai tu: k a paka soup en ai uen tu de fare kaukau 'I took a piece of soap and I went to the bathroom' ai si: de malatea behind de ahua, ai ran, ai sing ada un and ai hi: r mai coroba singdaun in de rok 'I saw the behind the rock, I ran, I fell down and I heard the crowbar fall down inside the rock'.

The Palmers ton Islanders disassociate themselves from this kind of stereotype. During my stay on their island, however, I was able to overhear utterances exhibiting a similar degree of language mixing. Much more detailed studies are needed in the areas of sociolinguistics, the use of Polynesian words and the provenance of English dialectal lexicon. 2.3. Syntactic sketch of Palmerston English (PE) 2.3.1. The nominal group Determiners In most cases, a definite article de 'the', pronounced di in front of vowels is used: de men drop daun 'the man falls down'; di oul pipaJs yus tu sei 'the old people used to say'. Other determiners include a for 'a', 01 ' all' or meni 'much, many' and plenti 'much, many plenty' . The demonstrative articles are dis and dat: dis 'this': shi nais dis gel 'this girl is nice'; dat or det

525

'that': det men is moa strong a den di oda uan 'that man is stronger than the other one'. There are several ways to express the plural of the demonstrative article. 'These' is expressed by dis: dis 'ausis 'these houses;. 'Those' is either expressed by det or by dous (and dem): det tris ova dea 'those trees over there'; dous bois 'those boys'. Dous seems to be the more usual form. Dis indicates a person or an object close to the speaker, whereas dat refers to something more distant. It would be interesting to gather more data in this field in order to determine whether there is some correspondence to the three-level Maori system: the person/thing close to me-the person/thing close to you-the person/thing close to himlher which might be expressed by dis-dat -de. The plural of the noun We were able to observe an important variation between 'regular' plural forms corresponding to the norms of standard English and 'irregular' ones. This variation can be found in the speech of the same person on the same day. Examples of irregular forms: pipaJs 'people, wimens 'women', mens 'men', childrens 'children'. Personal pronouns Subject forms

singUlar: ai 'I',yu 'you', 'i 'he', shi 'she', it 'it' plural: ui 'we', yu 'you', dey 'they' Yu lot and dem lot are variants for yu in the plural and dey, respectively. Sometimes, yus takes the place of the plural of the second person. All informants agree that this form is not part of Palmers ton English, but it comes from the Rarotonga variety of English where the final -s after yu indicates the plural. There is also a dual form which seems to have been obligatory for the first three generations. Today is still frequently used, but it is tending to become more and more a free variant.

dual: ui tu or yami 'the two of us', yu tu 'the two of you', di oda tu or dous tu 'the two of them'.

526 Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher

The indications concerning the variants ui tu and yami are contradictory: For some of the informants ui tu is the older form, for others yami is more archaic. There is a special use of the dual which can be explained by the influence by Polynesian grammar: yu tu en matavia aa ia 'you are here with Matavia' (literally: 'you two and Matavia are here'; in the sense: 'there are two persons, yourself and Matavia'). It is not rare to find sentences with no pronoun at all. This may be partially explained by phonetic simplification (especially in the case of its which is reduced to is-or it, in other cases), but there seems to be a more general tendency: is rat 'it is rotten'; is ueri gud a dem '(it is) very good of them'; aua uashmashin uas spoil en nau is alrai agen 'our washing-machine was broken down and now it is working again'

The object forms of the pronoun are mi 'me', yu 'you', 'im 'him', 'ea 'her', it 'it', us 'us', yulyu lot 'you' and dem/dem lot 'them'. Examples: tramtramp 'im! 'hold him down!'; ui meiks it jram de kokonat tri 'we make it from the coconut tree'; ai uas folouin dem lot tu de bush 'I was following them to the bush'. The forms 'i and shi, 'im and 'ea are consistently distinguished. However, we were able to observe the neutralization of the gender distinction: it may be used for persons of both sexes, adults or children and in a singular or even a plural sense: 'it it! 'hit them!' (talking about two boys or adults) of it! 'take him off!'; stoun it! 'stone her!' The possessive Possessive pronouns like English 'mine', 'yours' etc. are not frequent in Palmers ton English. We noticed only one case, in

combination with a "double genitive": gimi det an ov yuas! 'give me that hand of yours!' which is characterized as archaic. The possessive determiners are mai 'my': mai fada 'my father'; yu 'your': yu fish 'your fish'; did yu ev yu uash, boil 'did you have your wash, boy?'; yua neim is uat? 'what's your name?' is considered correct PE for some informants, whereas for others it is wrong. 'is 'his' and 'e a 'her' exist, they are often replaced by its: teik it to its 11Ulda! 'take him/her to hislher mother!'

For the first person of the plural, ou a is the normal form: us meiks aua oun keik 'we make our own cake' (reinforced by oun). Older people can be heard saying us mada for 'our mother' and there might have been the use of ui mada in the same sense during the generations that are now extinct. 'Your' is expressed by yu lat: yu latfish 'your fish' (belonging to several persons). 'Their' is dem lat or dem lats: dem lat fish 'their fish'; dem lats mada 'their mother'. Dea seems to be a modern variant. The dual forms are: dem tu af us fish 'the fish belonging to the two of us' dem tu afyufish 'the fish belonging to the two of you' dem tu fel a fish 'the fish belonging to the two of them' Adjectives The adjective can be used in an attributive way: 'i yus a yon tshail 'he is just a young child'. There is also a predicative use (description of a state): 'i yon 'he is young'; ai wonda if de uata is hot 'I wonder whether the water is hot'; en ai seis sach a pasen laik 11Ulisefueri pur 'and I say that a person like myself was very poor'.2 As the comparative and superlative forms, 'regular' and 'irregular' comparative forms coexist. Here are some of the irregular ones:

Palmerston English

det men is moa strong a den di oda men 'this man is stronger than the other one' dea s lesa sinks on det bout 'there are less things on the boat' There are different types of superlatives as well: fes 'first' , las 'last' and wastes 'worst'. The usual way of intensifying the value of an adjective is the use of the adverb ueri 'very' preceding the adjective or of another adverb like bran in bran niu 'brand new'. There is another, more traditional way to express the same idea: the reduplication of the adjective: it s a long long uei tu de uata 'it's a very long way to the water/it's a long, long way to the water'; dis fish is bedbed 'this fish is very bad' . 2.3.2. The verbal group Tense The present tense is signalled by an -s added to the verb stem for all persons except the third person of the singular (!) and, in most cases, the second person of the plural. The continuous form is found very frequently. The construction is verb +ing (sometimes in). For the present tense, an auxiliary may precede the verb, but this is not obligatory: wi living in dis haus 'we are living in this house'. The present continuous can express a vague reference to the future, but the most frequent use of the continuous form is to express the idea of the past. For this, it is preceded by bin: yu bin stopin in rarao, nau yu stop in ia? 'you have been staying in Raro and now you are staying here?' Most of our informants told us that the combination of bin + verb in the ordinary form was not correct. Nevertheless, in spontaneous speech, almost all of them often used sentences of that kind: it neva bin rein 'it hasn't been raining'. Bin is also used alone. According to the context, bin can be translated into standard English by the present perfect or the past tense: yestadei 'i bin bat tadei 'i neva bin 'yesterday he was there but today he hasn't been'. Palmers ton English has other ways of expressing the past:

527

*by using the present tense if the context is clear: sou maifada tel mi 'thus my father told me' (he died a long time ago); sou det fela kech de fish 'thus the man caught the fish' (after the hurricane last year) *by using 'past tense' forms: ui uea bi: tin ap fa det rok 'we are approaching that rock by boat'; ui meikt 'we made'; uen ai groud ap 'when I grew up'. The future can be expressed by the simple present or present continuous. The older people use a future with gana/gana/gona. We have as yet not been able to find detailed rules accounting for all the sentences we collected. As a general rule, one can say that there is a tendency towards simplification when compared with 'standard' British English (present form instead of past ones, homogeneous tense of the sentence in spite of different levels expressed). Aspect A complete and exhaustive grammar of the verbal group in PE should take the aspect as pivot. In this study, only a short list of its main features can be presented. Repetition expressed by reduplication This process is frequently used in PE: de boi noknok 'is 'ed 'the boy is/was knocking his head several times'; pikpik de Ii: f 'pick up the leaves'; gou en baitbait de fud af de foul' go and break up the food of the fowl into small pieces' (you bite it, so that they can eat it).

For the second and the third examples, the idea of repetition is clear. The first one could express a continuous effort of fighting against someone who is trying to get up again, or in this case, the reduplication could just be seen as an intensifier. Reduplication also occurs with the continuous form:

528 Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher

de boi uas kikikin de bol 'the boy was kicking the ball again and again'; 'i uas pulpulin de gels ea 'he didn't stop tearing the girl's hair' . Yus (sometimes pronounced chus) to express a link with the present In most of the cases, yus + verb describes an action of a very close past, very often it is followed by nau at the end of the sentence:

other English-related languages would seem highly desirable 2.3.3. Clauses and other features Interrogative clauses The interrogative clause has not yet been fully studied. Work on it is in preparation. Several typical features may be due to Polynesian influence: so, frequently, the question word is situated at the end of the sentence and there is often a rising intonation without inversion.

'i yus got bak nau 'he has just come back (now)'

From the context, the idea of completion is implied here and indeed, yus is often combined with the completive finish. The polite request of advice with beta/beta Beta is one of the most frequently used modality markers. With a second person addressee, it expresses a polite order: yu beta keajul uat yu du 'you should be careful about what you are doing/going to do' yu beta Usn rait uat 'i sei 'you are advised to listen well to what he says'

It is also used with the first person. In this case, it is a statement or a counsel based on the experience of the speaker: ui beta ev aua ti nau 'we better have tea now (afterwards, it would be too late), ai beta gona uach dem bois 'I should watch the boys (because I know that they are always naughty)' .

Other aspect markers The above list of aspect markers is not exhaustive at all. The place occupied by other elements such as mait, masbi, olweis has yet to be defined as well as the function of the tense markers. A more profound study of PE and a comparison with

Negative clauses The normal negation marker is neva: pamastan neva bin uin 'Palmerston did not win' ai neva bin sink det ju kan cham 'I didn't think you could jump'; yesterdd 'i bin but tadei 'i neva bin 'he went yesterday, but not today'. The way of answering a negative question follows the European strategy and not the Pacific way: yu neva bin stoping in raro? 'you have never been to Raro?' nou, ai neva bin stoping in raro 'no, ... '; yes, ai bin 'yes, ... '. Imperative clauses The imperative is formed as follows: of it! 'take her off!' stoun it! 'stone himlher!'

In some cases, the imperative can be reinforced by yus: yus tramp det stik! 'just hold that stick down!' It can also be accompanied by a preceding pronoun: yu kom bai mi 'sit by my side' (archaic) Prepositions There are a great number of prepositions, usually reminiscent of standard English prepositions, but frequently quite different in their use.

Palmerston English

yu kom bai mi 'sit by my side' (archaic); uat apen uen yu wen OVg? 'what happened when you went over?' ; 'i uea bitin op tu det rok uan dei 'he was approaching that/the rock by boat one day'

There is a general tendency to omit prepositions: shi gon de bush 'she went to the bush' yu beta keful uat yu du 'be careful about what you do' Serial verbs and conjunctions Combining several verbs without apparent links is frequently encountered throughout our corpus. Examples include: gou get de bakgt gV uatg! 'go and get the bucket of water!' 'uri pak dg uatg Jg de toilet! 'bring quickly the water for the toilet'

The same idea can also be expressed by two verbs conjoined by an/en: yu ran en pik de naif 'you run to get the knife'; ui beta gou aut en trai get on det ship 'we better go out and try to get on that ship' an/en is here more than a link expressing simultaneity, it stands for a purpose.

Other conjunctions are: but 'but' to express the opposite: did yu uin? - but ui chus gat uan 'did you win? - contrary to your expectations, we only got one (trophy)' if'if to introduce an indirect question: ai wondg if shi s marid 'I wonder whether she is married'; bai - bai (expressing the condition). sou 'thus' expressing the manner or the content and uen 'when' to express the time.

529

Predicate marker Quite often, a predicate marker (resumptive pronoun) is used in PE: sam pipgl dey len it mog Jastg 'some people learn it faster'; det men, 'i ran gwei 'that man ran away'; det wumen, shi to: k tu much 'that woman talks too much'; en des uai de children t gdei dey doun wan tu mis deg kap g ti in de mo: nin 'and that's why the children don't want to miss their cup of tea in the morning'

The predicate with the predicate marker can precede the nominal group: shi nais dis gel 'this girl is nice' it nevg bin shainin de san 'the sun has never been shining'

However, the use of the predicate marker is not obligatory. According to our informants, both: de men dey gon tu uea? and de men gon tu uea? 'where did the men go?' are possible. 3. Conclusion The social history of Palmers ton Island English has had a strong impact on its linguistic stature. Three main factors appear to account for its differences from "standard English": A) The historical and dialectal variety: Gloucestershire (?) English from the middle of the 19th century This influence has to be discussed as we know that Marsters left England (there is no detailed information about his birthplace, only a kind of island legend) as a very young man. He also spent some time in California and in other Pacific islands before he settled in Palmerston. Even then it must have been difficult for him to keep his "pure" English accent as the majority of the

530 Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher

English-speaking people he met during his Palmers ton period did not come from England. The particular vowel system of Palmerston English, for instance, could be explained to some extent by the influence of historical and regional English (but also partially by the contact with Polynesian languages). I leave this point to the specialists in this field. B) The second language of Marsters's wives from Penrhyn It seems that William Marsters tried to prevent his wives from speaking Maori. He was a very distrustful person and he did not want them to communicate in a language he could not (fully) understand. He obliged his children-and later on, his grandchildren-to speak English all the time. However, the language of the mothers is likely to have produced interferences. According to witnesses, Marsters's influence was greater than the Bible on what is known to be a religious island. C) The evolution of the language on Palmerston over the generations There has been a continuous change between periods of isolation and times of contact with people from the Cook Islands, the Pacific region and the whole world. For the first two generations, William Marsters's linguistic norm was a law everyone tried to follow as much as possible. For the generations born after his death, this is less so the case. Today, there is much variation due to sociolinguistic factors such as differences between generations - between the people with some experience abroad and those staying on the island of situation: depending on whether a Palmerston Islander is talking to somebody from his island or to a foreigner of the themes: the 'typical' features are more likely to appear if the subject of the conversation has a strong emotional link with the speaker (his home island, his family, his life). Recent changes are due to increased contacts with Rarotonga English or New Zealand English

(a great number of Palmerston Islanders are working abroad) and to the videos that are watched almost every night in all the houses. Traditional Palmerston English has a very special chanting melody. The data adduced here shows that PE is a variety of English which has been modified as a result of interference from Polynesian: the phonology, the lexicon and the grammar all display unmistakable evidence of the modification of English used as a L2 by L1 Polynesian speakers. For example, the partial loss of the voiced/ voiceless contrast in the consonant system; the Polynesian borrowings and the incorporation of Polynesian elements in derivational processes; the word-order in stative predicatives (shi nais dis gel) and in interrogation. It is likely that there are local innovations as well, even if research to date has not been able to identify these positively. The apparently optimal character and reduced inventory (from the perspective of English) of tense/ aspect distinctions may be one such innovation. From the study, a number of directives for future work stand out. First and foremost, more detailed and extensive fieldwork. Second, comparative work, including minimally the following: comparison with dialectal Englishes, with the Polynesian languages of Manihiki, Penrhyn, and especially with PitcairnlNorfolk English (PN). An initial and very superficial survey of the available literature on the latter (Chris Come, personal communication) suggests a useful working hypothesis: that PE and PN show essentially similar Polynesian influences, the exact degree and nature of which remain to be determined. From a broader perspective, PE (and PN) appear to be classic cases of mixing and vernacularization which have produced languages which, while new languages, are varieties of English rather than new languages without genetic affiliation in the usual sense. Thus PE appears to fit into the tradition exemplified by Reunion Creole and the Michif language of Manitoba (c. Corne, ms., see also Peter Bakker and Robert A. Papen, Michif and other languages of the Canadian Metis in this Atlas).

Palmerston English

531

Notes 1. Linguistic fieldwork on Palmers ton English was made possible by a contribution from Miihlhausler's Australian Research Grants Commission grant for the Atlas Project in 1991. I am grateful to Peter Miihlhiiusler from Adelaide University and to Chris Corne from

the University of Auckland for their scientific guidance during the writing of this article. 2. This study does not discuss the possible presence of the auxiliary in Palmers ton English.

References Clark, Commander Victor 1960 On the wind of a dream, the saga of solace. London: Hutchinson & Co. Corne, Chris Michif, Morysen and more: "creolization" as mixing, levelling and vernacularization (ms.). Crocombe, Ron G. 1947 "Land tenure in a test tube: the case of Palmers ton Atoll", in: H.P. Lundsgaarde (ed.), Land tenure of Oceania. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. Department of Lands and Survey 1984 NZMS 272/8/7, Palmerston, Cook Islands. Wellington. Douglas, Norman and Ngaire (eds.) 1989 Pacific Islands Yearbook 16. Australia: Sydney: Angus and Robertson. Gill, W. Wyatt 1885 Jottings from the Pacific (pp.33-38). The Religious Tract Society. Helm, AS.-W.H. Percival 1974 Sisters in the sun-the story of Suwarrow and Palmerston Atolls. London: The Travel Book Club. Ingram, Pryor-Pamela Takiora 1976 Palmerston Atoll-a study of contemporary change in an atoll community. A

Relevant map Developments in English-derived contact languages (Palmerston Island English and PitcairneseiNorfolkese). Compiled by Peter Miihlhiiusler. Map 48.

Senior Honors B. A. Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, May 1976. Major,Lome 1983 A study of relations between and within the three lineages of Palmers ton Atoll and with outsiders. University of Victoria, British Columbia (B.A.), May 1983. Statistics Office 1977 Cook Islands Census of Population and Housing 1976. Central Planning Bureau Government of the Cook Islands, November. 1992 Cook Islands Census of Population and Dwellings 1991. Preliminary results, Rarotonga, February. Thorogood, B. 1960 Not quite Paradise. London: London Missionary Society. Wilson, James (Captain) n.d. A missionary voyage to the Southern Pacific Ocean 1796-1798. Vienna, Austria: Frederick A Praeger. Zettersten, A 1969 The English of Tristan da Cunha. Lund: Lund Studies in English 37.

Productive fellow Philip Baker The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Introduction Since the beginning of the 19th century,fellow has been involved in a remarkable series of innovations in different varieties of Pidgin English in the southwestern Pacific. In chronological order, these are: (a) suffixed to black and white, it has been used to form ethnic labels; (b) combined with either of the demonstratives this and that, it has tended to function as a third person singular pronoun; (c) postposed to adjectives, it has functioned as a kind of adjectival identifier (where there is an immediately following noun) and also, clause finally, as an adverbial formant; (d) postposed to cardinal numbers, it has similarly functioned as a kind of numeral identifier; and (e) postposed to singular pronouns, it has been used to form a series of corresponding plural pronouns. Each of these developments will be examined in turn. Abbreviations for territories DNG (former) German New Guinea NCA New Caledonia NSW New South Wales PAP Papua QLD Queensland SOL Solomon Islands TAS Tasmania VAN Vanuatu VIC Victoria WES Western Australia Ethnic "fellow" The use of black fellow for Aborigine and white fellow for European is attested in Australia from

the start of the 19th century. Four of the earliest examples are given below. (1) NSW 1801 no blackfellow (Grant 1803: 91; "that is not an Aborigine") (2) TAS -1820 Hanging no xxxxx good for blackfellow. Very goodfor whitefellow. He used to it (Boxall 1899: 24; Speaker is NSW Aborigine) (3) NSW 1823 black-fellows, when they died, would jump up, or rise again, white-fellows, and that white-fellows would jump up black-fellows (Lang 1847: 415) (4) WES 1829 [leeches are] very good for white fellow, but very bad for blacks (Wilson 1835: 259) By 1847, both forms are attested in all Australian states (see the relevant map).] With the exception of New Zealand's Chatham islands (Dieffenbach 1842: 208), neither form is found outside Australia until after the start of the Labour Trade (1863), which indicates that they were subsequently further diffused from Queensland. The development of blaclifellow and whitefellow as individual lexical items, which led to their increasingly being written hyphenated or as single words,2 represents a departure from standard usage but it does not appear to be directly linked to subsequent innovations involving fellow. Rather, as will be seen below, subsequent innovations were to limit the currency of these words outside Australia. Demonstrative "fellow" From the 1820s, there are examples of that fellow, such as (5) and (6), which suggest that it functioned as a third person singular pronoun. (5) NSW 1826 Dat pellow no goot, massa (Dawson 1830: 65)

534

Philip Baker

(6) VIC 1842 I believe that fellow directly shootum all about blackfellow! (Curr 1883: 116)

(9) QLD -1842- Where big fellow water sitdown? (Archer 1897: 141, cited by Dutton 1983) (10) WES 1842 Me sow piccaninny taty - by by he jump up big fellow! (Wollaston 1948: 50)

found about forty years earlier than VERB ADJ fellow. As there is no other feature which appears to have originated in WES and then been introduced from there into QLD, it seems quite likely that VERB ADJ fellow was independently innovated in QLD, and that both structures were more widely diffused from there. In the earliest examples of ADJ fellow NOUN in NSW,fellow is found with di- and tri-syllabic adjectives such as stupid, saucy and (Aboriginal) budgery as well as with monosyllabic ones. From about the middle of the 19th century, however, fellow is everywhere found only with monosyllabic adjectives, a pattern which persists to this day. As the monosyllabic adjective fellow pattern spread, so there was the potential for conflict between the ethnic nouns blackfellow and whitefellow and their adjectival homophones. The outcome was that the ethnic nouns survived in Australia while the adjectives triumphed in Melanesia. The set of monosyllabic adjectives to which fellow is typically suffixed is essentially the same in all territories, i.e. they comprise all the most frequent monosyllabic English adjectives. This means that it is all but impossible to assess whether and to what extent it was individual forms such as e.g. big fellow or strong fellow or the ADJ fellow NOUN structure itself which was diffused from one territory to another. Exceptionally two competing forms, small fellow and little fellow (the first element of which was almost certainly given a monosyllabic pronunciation), have contrasting patterns of attestation which may be informative. These are set out on the relevant map. It may be significant that the QLD form little fellow reached DNG and PAP a little earlier than the VAN form small fellow (which ultimately triumphed over little fellow in all varieties of Melanesian Pidgin English).

These two structures are documented in respectively, twelve and six different territories: as set out on the relevant map. Note that, with the exception of WES, wherever both structures are found in the same territory, ADJ fellow NOUN is

Numerate ''fellow'' Within a few years of the first examples of ADJ fellow NOUN, the analogous structure NUMERAL fellow NOUN is also found:

First found in NSW, that fellow is subsequently documented in eleven other territories (see the relevant map). Its distribution in Melanesia is very similar to that of blackfellow and whitefellow, suggesting that it too was diffused from Queensland in the wake of the Labour Trade. Somewhat later, this fellow is also found functioning as a pronoun. This is first attested in the Northern Territory, an area ill-placed for the diffusion of pidgin features to Melanesia. It could well be, therefore, that its appearance in Vanuatu some twenty years later was an independent innovation, and that it was carried from the latter to all the other territories where it is subsequently attested. See the relevant map for details. Adjectival ''fellow'' From 1824, there are examples such as (7) and (8) of adjective + fellow predicate finally. (7) TAS 1824 You goodfellow, mob no kill you (Melville 1959,1: 33; speaker is an Aborigine from NSW) (8) NSW 1825 you very stupidfellow (Troy 1985: 286 citing Threlkeld)

Except insofar as they follow zero copula, these do not represent a clear departure from standard usage though they are suggestive of developments which were to follow. From 1842 there are two important innovations involving the combination of adjectives andfellow. These are the structures ADJECTIVE fellow NOUN and VERB ADJECTIVE fellow, illustrated by the earliest known examples of each:

Productive fellow

(11) QLD 1848 I threw him down one fellow compass somewhere here (Carron 1849: 118) (12) VAN 1877 Suppose you give me one fellow musket, me give you one fellow boy (Giles 1968: 41) As the pattern of attestations set out on the relevant map indicates, this was clearly a QLD innovation which was diffused largely but not entirely as a result of the Labour Trade. Pronominal pluralizing "fellow" In the period 1866-83, four plural pronouns are attested, each of them consisting of a singular English pronoun + fellow.

(13) QLD 1866 (Aborigine speaker) Baal mine care suppose youfellow all go like 'it (Eden 187475: 51) (14) SOL -1874- Catchum rum mefella no sick.. (Raabe 1927: 120) (15) SOL -1874- Hefella tambo? Hefella stoff along bus-sh? (Raabe 1927: 176) (16) NCA -1883 (ni-Vanuatu speaker) Himfellow all same man-a-bush (Schuchardt 1883: 18) While you fellow was undoubtedly a QLD innovation, there is not the slightest evidence that the structure of single English pronoun + fellow = corresponding plural pronoun was transmitted elsewhere, as the absence of both he fellow and himfellow in QLD at any time indicates. Note also that, before me fellow, which appears to be a SOL innovation, is found in QLD (from 1886), there are several attestions of me two fellow, as in (17):

535

(17) QLD 1883 me two fellow pull him out Tom out of water (Queensland State Archives 1883; no pagination) All QLD examples of me two fellow are attributed to Pacific islanders. This form is later found in DNG (1898) and VAN (1914). Summary and conclusions The relevant map indicates that the fe !low innovations reviewed in this section originated in three main locations: New South Wales, Queensland and Melanesia (the Solomons and Vanuatu). The NSW innovations are blackfellow, whitefellow and that fellow. These spread northwards into QLD and clockwise to Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia. The Queensland innovations include AD] fellow NOUN, NUMBER fellow NOUN, you fellow and, probably, VERB AD] fellow. These were carried to territories to the north and east and, in some cases to New South Wales and Western Australia. The Melanesian innovations include me fellow, he fellow, him fellow and, probably, this fellow. These were rapidly diffused in neighbouring territories, including Queensland. Fellow has been involved in more innovations than any other English lexeme in Pacific Pidgin English. A detailed examination of the indigenous languages, for the most part Aboriginal and Melanesian, which were in contact with Pidgin English, is needed to establish the extent to which these innovations may have been influenced by structural features of indigenous languages.

Notes 1. Here and throughout, "all Australian states" refers to each of the six states of Australia (in their modern boundaries) plus Northern Territory. 2. The writing of these words as single, nonhyphenated forms is somewhat later than

might be assumed from example (2). The same example, attributed perhaps more reliably to 1824, is given by Melville (1959, 1: 33) as Hanging no good for black fellow. Very good for white fellow, for he used to it.

536

Philip Baker

References Archer, Thomas 1897 Recollections of a rambling life. Yokohama. Boxall, Geo. E. 1899 The story of Australian bush-rangers. London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co. Carron, William 1849 Narrative of an expedition undertaken under the direction of the late Mr. Assistant Surveyor E B Kennedy for the exploration of the country between Rockingham Bay and Cape York. Sydney: Kemp and Fairfax. Curr, Edward M. 1883 Recollections of Squatting in Victoria (... ) From 1841 to 1851. Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide: George Robertson. Dawson, Robert 1830 The present state of Australia; (... ). London: Smith, Elder & Co. Dieffenbach, Ernest 1842 "An account of the Chatham islands", in: Journal of the Royal Geographical Society 12: 195-211. Dutton, Tom 1983 "The origin and spread of Aboriginal Pidgin English in Queensland: a preliminary account", Aboriginal History 7: 90-122. Eden, Charles Henry 1874-75 "An Australian search party", in: Bates (ed.), Illustrated travels. London: Cassell, Petter and Gulpin 1869-75, vols 5 and 6. Giles, W. E. 1968 A cruize (sic) in a Queensland labour vessel to the south seas, edited by Deryck Scair. Canberra: Australian National University Press and London: Hurst.

Relevant map The spread of "fellow" as a grammatical affix. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 55.

Grant, James 1803 The narrative of a voyage of discovery performed in His Majesty's vessel The Lady Nelson, (... ) in the years 1800, 1801, and 1802, to New South Wales. London: T. Edgerton. Lang, John Dunmore 1847 Cooksland in north-eastern Australia; the future cotton-field of Great Britain (... ). London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans. Melville, Henry 1959 The History of Van Diemen's Landfrom the year 1824 to 1835, inclusive. Sydney: n.pbl. 3 parts. Queensland State Archives 1883 Queensland Department of Justice papers. Raabe, H. E. 1927 Cannibal nights. The reminiscences of a free-lance trader. New York: Payson & Clarke Ltd. Schuchardt, Hugo 1883 "Kreolische Studien V 'Uber das Melaneso-englische''', in: Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 105: 151-61. Troy, J. 1985 Australian Aboriginal contact with the English language in New South Wales: 1788 to 1845. Unpublished B.A. honours thesis, University of Sydney. Wilson, T. B. 1835 Narrative of a voyage around the world; ( ... ). London: Sherwood, Gilbert & Piper. Wollaston, John Ramsden 1948 Wollaston's Picton Journal. Perth: C. H. Pitman & Son.

The development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. Introduction In the recent past, pronouns have frequently been used as one of the most reliable indicators of genetic relationships. Much of the current debate on universals and substratum interference in Melanesian Pidgin English has also focussed on pronouns (see Keesing 1988, Miihlhausler 1986, Miihlhausler-Harre 1990). Our findings in this section, demonstrate that the historical study of pronominal forms in Pacific PE can indeed add greatly to our understanding of these matters. We start from the position that any major departure from the English pronoun system in varieties of Pacific PE is a local innovation. If, as is assumed by Keesing (1988) and others, a significant proportion of Pacific islanders were initially exposed to some kind of "Worldwide Nautical Pidgin English" (WNPE) rather than, or in addition to, non-pidginized varieties of English, we believe that evidence for this will emerge from our data. Compared with the English pronoun system, the innovations found in Pacific PE are of three kinds:

(a)

the selection of one pronoun form per person and number; (b) the selection of the corresponding possessive pronoun or possessive adjective as general purpose pronoun; and (c) more radical departures from the English pronoun system. All pronoun innovations attested in Pacific PE are set out in chronological order and by territory in Table 1. This table also includes for comparison the earliest attestations of all the English subject pronouns in these pidgins. It can be seen that these are in general found earlier than innovations

relating to the same person and number. One important shortcoming of the data in Table 1 is that it records as innovations only clear departures from English usage, and does not distinguish between you alone as a singular and plural pronoun (this being rarely apparent in the pidgin data consulted). (a) The selection of one pronoun form per person and number The most common example of this kind, found in almost every variety of Pacific PE, is the tendency to extend the use of me to subject position. (In no variety of Pacific PE is I attested in non-subject position.) Similarly, but less extensively, him is attested in subject position in many Pacific PEs. The map Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English shows the territories in which I and me and/or he and him were competing forms in subject position. The findings seem to indicate that the indigenous peoples throughout the whole area were exposed to normal English usage as well as 'foreigner-talk' English and/or PE. With regard to the first person plural pronouns, there are no examples of us alone in subject position but we is sporadically found in non-subject position in Fiji, Northern Territory, Papua, the Solomons, Torres Straits and Vanuatu. In general, however, first person plural forms gave way to more radical departures from the English pronoun system, as described under (c) below. As English has only one second person pronoun, you, there was no candidate to extend its domain, in contrast to the first and third person forms. On the contrary, separate singular and plural second person forms did develop in several Pacific PEs, as described under (c).

538

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Abbreviations used: CAR Caroline islands (including the Marshalls); COO Cook islands; CPE Chinese Pidgin English; DNG (former) German New Guinea; FH Fiji (excluding Rotuma); HAW Hawaii; KIR Kiribati and Tuvalu; LOY Loyalty islands; MRQ Marquesas; NAU Nauru; NCA New Caledonia excluding Loyalties); NOR Northern Territory; NSW New South Wales; NZE New Zealand; PAP Papua; PHI Philippines; PIT Pitcairn island; QLD Queensland; ROT Rotuma; RYU Ryukyu islands; SAM Western and American Samoa; SOL Solomons; SOU South Australia; TAH Tahiti; TAS Tasmania; TON Tonga; TOR Torres Straits islands; VAN Vanuatu; VIC Victoria; WAF Wallis and Futuna; WES Western Australia. Table 1. Pronouns in Pacific varieties of PE, in chronological order and by territory (including obsolete forms) innovations are in bold type

Feature

First attestations

first person CPE1747-, NSW1805, NZE1811 (others 181699: RYU, HAW, PIT, TAS, TON, VIC, MRQ, TAH, QLD, NOR, FIJ, SOU, VAN, CAR, KlR, LOY, WES, NCA,PAP, SOL, TOR, WAF, SAM, Coo,DNG) me ''!''/me'' (POl)NSW-1795-, CPE181l, NZE1814(others 1817-88: TAS, HAW, MRQ, TAH, TON, WES, SAM, KIR, VIC, ROT, CAR, SOU, QLD, FIJ, TOR, COO, NCA,LOY, WAF, VAN, DNG, SOL, PAP, NOR) me I "I" TOR1888 my "I; me" CPE -1830mine "I" VIC1842, QLD1857, NSW1876 (other: NOR-1959) 1"1"

we "we" CPE1811, PIT1821, NSW1824, (others 18321946: HAW, QLD, VIC, CAR, WAF, KIR, MRQ, NZE, LOY, VAN, DNG, PAP, TOR, SOL, NOR, SOU, JAP, COO, COl, TAH, NCA, TON) we "us" F1Jl868,1 VAN1871, TOR1888 (others 191043: PAP, SOL, NOR)

you and me "we" (P03)

QLD-1842-, NSW1850, S0L1884- (others 1885-1900: PAP, HAW, TOR, NCA, DNG, VAN) me fellow "we" (P06) S0L1874-, VAN1884, QLD1886 (others 1891-1939: TOR, DNG, PAP, NOR) we fellow "we" TORI888-, SOU1890, VAN1894 (other: SOL-1911) we two fellow QLD1891, VAN1893, NOR-1906us two fellow QLD1892, PAP1928 you me altogether S0L1897 you me two fellow S0L1897, DNGI898-, VAN1916 you me three fellow S0L1897, DNG1898me two fellow QLD1883, DNGI898-, VAN-1914 me you "we" DNG1914 me all "we" SAM-1915 allo thisee man "we" CPE1878

second

person CPE1769, NSW1793, HAW-1805(others 1814-80: NZE, RYU, TAS, PIT, TAH, TON, SAM, FIJ, MRQ, KIR, SOU, VIC, WES, QLD, CAR, NOR, TOR, NAU, VAN, LOY, COO, NCA, JAP, WAF, PAP, DNG, SOL)

you "you"

you fellow (P05)

QLD1866, TORI888-, PAP1898 (others 1909-46: SOL, DNG, VAN, WES,NOR) you two fellow QLD1891 you all "you (pl.)" SAM-1915

third person he "he" CPEI747-, NSW1793, HAW-1805- (others 1814-99: NZE, RYU, TAS, PIT, WES, VIC,SOU, MRQ, QLD, FIJ, NAU, NOR, LOY, WAF, NCA, COO, CAR, KIR, VAN, PAP, SOL, DNG, TOR, SAM, TON) he "him" CPE1747him "he" CPE1830, NSW1834, SOU1837 (others 1842-1915: QLD, VIC, TOR, CAR, VAN, WAF, LOY, NCA, SOL, NOR, KIR, WES, PAP, FII, DNG, SAM) dat/that "he/him" NSW1826 that fellow "he/him" NSW1826, VIC1836, QLD1842- (others 1871-90: VAN, PAP, TOR, SAM, NCA, DNG, SOL, NOR, SOU)

Development and diffusion o/pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English 539

Table 1. continued this fellow "he" VAN-1865-, QLD-1868-,2 DNG1886 (others 1888-1975: SOL, TOR, PAP, SAM) him he "he" (P08) TOR1888, S0L1897, VAN1900 (others 1910-24: PAP, DNG) hims "he" VAN1866, PAP1907 they "they" HAW1820, NSW1823, CPE1830 (others 1832-1946: SAM, FIJ, QLD, VIC, MRQ, KIR, VAN, DNG, SOL, PAP, TOR, NOR, SOU, CAR, NCA, COO) themldem "they" CPE1839, VIC1842, PAP1907 altogether "they" (P04) QLD-1858-, VAN1884, DNG1884 (others 1886-mod. SOL, PAP) he fellow "they" (P07) SOL-1874-, VAN-1886 him fellow NCA-1883, VAN1886, KIR1887 (others 1910-46: PAP, SAM, DNG, NOR) them fellow "they" WES1888, TOR1888-, PAP1910- (other: QLD1920) all he "they" (P09) DNG1908-, PAP1910-, VAN1914 (others 1942-75: SOL, SAM) all men "they" SAM-1915 they "them" CPE1915

resumptive pronouns resumptive he (P02) NZE1814-, HAW1824, CPE1841 (others: 1845-1908: FIJ, COO, TAH, KIR, VAN, NCA, CAR, SAM, DNG, QLD, PAP, ROT, TOR, SOL, MRQ, SOU, NOR) resumptive himNSW-1844-, VAN1866, TOR1882,3 (others 1883-1954: NCA, NOR, SOL, CAR, SOU, PAP, WES) resumptive theyQLD1885, MRQ1888, VAN1890 (others 1907-46: PAP, SAM) me me VAN-1914, DNG1983 you you VAN-1914, DNG1983

Of the five third person singular pronouns of English, she, her and it are attested only sporadically in Pacific PE. In Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) alone, he was early generalized to both non-subject and subject position (although with some competition from other forms including

him). In most other Pacific PEs, the tendency was in the other direction with him gradually extending its domain to subject position, as mentioned earlier and displayed on the map Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. Although the third person plural pronouns they and them are attested, at least marginally, in most varieties of Pacific PE, their distribution is almost always as in English. Exceptionally, them is found in subject position in just three varieties of PE: CPE (from 1839), Victoria (from 1842) and Papua (from 1907). For the most part, however, Pacific pidgins developed alternatives to the English third person plural pronouns, as discussed under (c) below. (b) The selection of the corresponding possessive adjective or possessive pronoun as general purpose pronoun This second kind of innovation is found in only three varieties of Pacific PE. Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) alone has my as general purpose 1st person singular pronoun from about 1830. (1) CPE 1831 my tinke- you now no hab so sick as before time! (Tilden 1831: 765; "I think that you are no longer as sick as you were earlier")

CPE had exclusively 1 as the subject form of the first person singular pronoun up to 1810 but me competes in this role thereafter. The third competing form-my-is found from 1830, as illustrated in (1). In contrast to the other forms, my occurs not only as the first person singular pronoun in all positions but also as the corresponding possessive adjective (its only role in English). From ca. 1840 onwards, my is attested as the pronoun with far greater frequency that the two other competing forms (Baker 1987: 166). Baker (1990: 255-257) suggests that my may not have been selected as such but rather that me [mil may have been transformed into something more closely resembling [maj] as the result of the influence of a Chinese-character manual which was extensively used for learning CPE in the Canton area from the late 1820s. In this manual,

540

Philip Baker and Peter Muhlhiiusler

the character chosen to represent the first person singular pronoun is pronounced [mil in some Cantonese dialects (including that of the Macau area where the manual may have originated) but [ffiAj] is more typical of the city of Canton. Thus the author of the manual may have chosen a character which, in his or her pronunciation represented [mi]-i.e. the me found in some CPE texts from 1811 onwards-but people who used the manual in Canton city to acquire some knowledge of CPE with a view to gaining employment or doing business with foreigners may have more often pronounced this character [ffiAj]. The latter pronunciation might thus have been interpreted as my by Anglophones and, in due course, used by them as a pronoun in addressing traders and servants. While it is not yet possible to confirm this, it is certainly the case that my is not attested graphically until after the manual had been published, and that there were several later editions of the manual, ensuring that its influence extended over several decades. A summary of the typological arguments regarding the relationship between personal and possessive pronouns is given by MiihlhauslerHarre (1990: 207-210). Both New South Wales (from 1832) and Queensland (from 1858) have mine as general purpose first person singular pronoun: (2) NSW 1832 mine beLonga Wonghibong tribe (Donaldson 1985: 130; "I belong to ... ") (3) QLD 1858 Supposs mine piaLLa you, bLackfeLLow directLy mumkuLL mine (Praed 1885: 25; "If I tell you, the Aborigines will kill me") Mine is not attested as a first person pronoun in other varieties of Pacific PE at any time. Mine is also noteworthy as one of only a handful of features of Queensland PE found in speech attributed to Aborigines but never in data attributed to Pacific islanders. (c) More radicaL departures from the English pronoun system The third group of innovations we identify consists of more radical departures from the English

system than any of the above. We believe these merit more discussion because: (i)

they are formally different from English and thus more reliable for tracing common inheritance in these pidgins; and (ii) they are found later than the English forms, i.e. their presence suggests a more developed form of pidgin.

There are ten such pronouns that we wish to consider, set out in Table 2: TabLe 2. Pronouns representing a more radical departure from the English system

person

singular

augmented

1 inclusive 1 exclusive

you me me fellow

2

you fellow

3

him he thatfeLLow this fellow

aLL he aLtogether he fellow him fellow

All of the above forms occur in Melanesian Pidgin English (MPE) and many of them are also found in Australia (including the Torres Straits). Few are found elsewhere. There is one known oc-currence of you me in Hawaiian PE in 1887, him fellow is found in Kiribati from the same year, and five are found in Samoa: that fellow (1883), him fellow (1914) and, while aLL he, this feLLow and aLtogether are first recorded only in 1975, all three might well earlier have formed part of Samoan Plantation Pidgin (see section 5.9. in the Atlas text The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler). Each of the pronouns in Table 2 is discussed individually below, as also is the resumptive use

Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English 541

of third person pronouns. Note that, with regard to the first and second person singular, there are no radical departures from the English pronoun system.

the same territory that we can be sure that at least the potential for distinguishing between the two in this way existed. The relevant dates of first attestation are set out in Table 3.

First person dual and plural In modem Melanesian Pidgin English (MPE), yumi «you and me) functions as the first person dual or plural inclusive. According to Keesing, the presence of a dual and an inclusive/exclusive distinction provides "the most compelling single piece of evidence of the historically primary role of Pacific islanders in shaping a developing pidgin in the Pacific" (1988: 142). It is thus of considerable interest to note that the form you me originated in Australia:

Table 3. Earliest attestations of first person plural pronouns forms in five PEs4

(4) NSW 1850 great God see, see in dark, see in light-see you, me, now-see you, me, all time (Boodle ca. 1874: 163). You (and) me is attested even earlier-1842-in Queensland (Petrie 1904: 73). This was long before the arrival in the latter of Pacific islanders. Note, however, that the role of you (and) me in Australia in the mid-19th century appears to have been simply that of a first person plural pronoun, i.e. there is no clear evidence in our data of either a duaVplural or inclusive/exclusive contrast at that time (although such contrasts are found in the relevant Aboriginal languages of New South Wales (Eades 1976) and Queensland (Holmer 1983». Although me fellow fulfils the role of first person plural exclusive in modem MPE, it is similarly not apparent that it can be glossed more precisely than "we" or "us" in any of its earliest attestations, starting with the Solomons in 1874: (5) Catchum rum mefella no sick (Raabe 1927: 116) Part of the problem may be that the Europeans and Americans to whom we are indebted for 19th century data were not aware of the inclusive/ exclusive contrast. It is thus only from the date that both you (and) me and me fellow are found in

QLD VAN SOL PAP DNG you (and) me me fellow both forms

1842 1894 1884 1885 1898 1886 1884 1874 1920 1908 1886 1894 1884 1920 1908

In addition to the above, note that a form me two fellow is attested in three of these territories, predating me fellow in QLD (1883) and DNG (1898) but postdating it in V AN (1914). Note also that you and me and me fellow are attested in the Torres Straits from 1888 and 1891, re-spectively. From the above data, we can be reasonably sure (i) that the form you (and) me was an Australian innovation of the 1840s taken to Melanesia by returning recruits about three decades later; (ii) that the form me fellow was a Melanesian innovation of the 1870s, introduced into Queensland by the following decade; and (iii) that the earliest potential for contrasting the two forms dates from the 1880s in Queensland and the Solomons. Before concluding this section, we must place on record the fact that several other first person plural forms, all representing radical departures from the English pronoun system, are attested in Pacific PEs, including the following (dates indicate the earliest attestation of the form in the named territory): we fellow (TOR 1888, SOU 1890, VAN 1894, SOL 1911) we two fellow (QLD 1891, VAN 1893, NOR 1906) us twofellow (QLD 1892, PAP 1928) you me altogether (SOL 1897) you me two fellow (SOL 1897, DNG 1898, VAN 1916)

542

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

me you (DNG 1914) me all (SAM 1915)

This range of competing forms suggests that the modern two-way distinction between you me (inclusive/dual) and me fellow (exclusive/ plural) may not have been widely established until the early decades of the present century. Second person plural Our data indicate that you fellow was an Aboriginal innovation which thad taken place in Queensland by 1866: (6) Baal mine care suppose you fellow all go like 'it ----- (Eden 1874-75: 51; "I don't mind if you (pl.) ... ")

This subsequently became established in MPE twenty or so years later. One might have expected that the use of English singular pronoun + fellow to form the corresponding plural set would result from a single innovation but our data do not provide clear evidence of that. Consider first the sequence of attestations of singular pronoun plus fellow set out in Table 4. In addition to the list of territorie.s and dates in Table 4, it should be noted that Torres Straits has mefellow (from 1891) and you fellow (from 1888) but lacks both the third person forms. Table 4. Combinations of singular pronoun + fellow with plural reference

mefellow youfellow 5 he fellow him fellow

QLD

VAN

SOL

1883 1866

1884 1914 1886 1886

1874 1920 1901 1909 1898 1911 1874 1910 1920

PAP DNG

The above data suggest that both me fellow and he fellow were Solomons innovations, that you fellow was a Queensland innovation, and that him fellow was a Vanuatu innovation. Thus, if fellow had been identified as 'pronoun pluralizer', we would

have to suppose that such an innovation took place in three different territories in the 1870s and 1880s. Such a possibility is rendered even more unlikely by that fact that fellow is found in combination with plural English pronouns in all these territories: we fellow in Torres Straits Vanuatu and the Solomons (see preceding sectio~ for dates), and them (dem) fellow in Torres Straits, Papua and Queensland (see discussion of third person plural pronouns below for dates). Of the six combinations of English pronoun + fellow discussed here, only me fellow and you fellow have survived to the present day. All that can be concluded, therefore, is that there was a widespread tendency, starting in the 1860s, to add fellow to English pronouns, and that it took several decades before the modem situation-me and you s.ingular, me fellow and you fellow plural, and the dIsappearance of all other combinations of English pronoun + fellow-had become established throughout the region. (On the loss of he fellow and him fellow, see discussion of the third p~rson singular below. On the developmental hIstOry of fellow in Australian PE and MPE, see the Atlas text entitled Productive "fellow" by Philip Baker.) Before proceeding to the discussion of third person forms which represent a radical departure from the English pronoun system, it may be useful to discuss resumptive pronouns. Resumptive pronouns This section is concerned with the status and origin of the 'resumptive' use of pronouns, such as he, him and them (dem) after nouns, as in woman he/him/dem come "a/the woman/women come(s)" and he alone after third person pronouns, as in him he come "he/she/it comes". As can be seen from Table 1, resumptive pronouns are far more widely attested in Pacific PE than those of the other pronouns which represent a more radical departure from the English system (Table 2). Keesing (1988, chapters 9-12) discusses and speculates on the development of such use of he [i], in MPE in general and in the Solomons in particular, in considerable detail, relating this to

Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English

the subject referencing pronouns of Oceanic languages. We accept that Oceanic languages have influenced the development of MPE, and have done so to an increasing extent, but differ from Keesing in believing that such influence is both slighter and more recent than he supposes (cf Miihlhausler 1987; Baker 1993). In particular, we take the view that the history of resumptive he must be considered together with the other two resumptive pronouns of the region, him and they. From New Zealand in 1814 to the Northern Territory in 1908, resumptive he is widely attested throughout the Pacific, as set out on the map Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. The other two resumptive pronouns, largely if not entirely obsolete today, are attested only in the south-west of the region. The first Pacific attestation of resumptive he comes from New Zealand (7). It is far from certain that this feature was diffused from there because New Zealand did not have frequent communications with any of the places where it is documented in the following half century and because sporadic use of resumptive pronouns occurs in colloquial English. It thus seems rather more probable that this feature developed independently in several different territories. However, Vanuatu, where it is found from 1865 (8), could be responsible for its subsequent diffusion to all other varieties of MPE as well as to Queensland. (7) NZE 1814 Captain, he come to New Zealand,

he come ashore, and tihi all my potatoes (Nicholas 1817,1: 11) (8) VAN ca. 1865 Tanna man he no too much like work (McFarlane 1873: 106)

Resumptive him is first recorded in New South Wales in 1844 but is found only sporadically thereafter. There are no known examples from Queensland at any time, suggesting that its subsequent appearance elsewhere may have been an independent development. Vanuatu is the next earliest place where this is found but there are no

543

known examples there after 1880. Note that, unlike he and, to a lesser extent, they, resumptive him does not occur in colloquial English. Resumptive him is thus a more radical departure from English than resumptive he or they. Resumptive they is first attested in Queensland (from a Melanesian in 1885) and, shortly afterwards, in Vanuatu (1890). (Another early attestation, in the Marquesas in 1888, probably results from an independent development.) Keesing (1988: 153) mentions the resumptive use of two other pronouns, me and you, citing Jacomb (1914). While he provides evidence of their occurrence in Vanuatu today, we are not aware of any attestations of these between Jacomb (1914) and the 1970s and thus assume that such forms were rather rare until comparatively recently. It may be worth noting that resumptive first and second person singular pronouns are very common in the putative Oceanic substratum languages where there is also a strong tendency to realise the third person resumptive pronoun as zero. This suggests that such languages are not good candidates for a source of MPE pronominal grammar. Although resumptive pronouns are widely attested in the PEs of the Pacific region, it should be noted that their occurrence is generally sporadic, with the exception of modem varieties of MPE in which they are fully grammaticalized. It seems likely that the introduction of resumptive pronouns in these pidgins was favoured by the existence of subject referencing pronouns in many indigenous languages of the region (with the important exception of the relevant Aboriginal languages of New South Wales). Nevertheless, this also suggests that resumptive pronouns in PEs spoken in territories where indigenous languages have subject referencing pronouns may result from independent parallel development as well as from-or instead of-transmission from one PE to another. Among the territories involved in the labour trade, Vanuatu looks to have been the most important for the dispersal of resumptive pronouns to other PEs. However, the fact that three different resumptive pronouns are attested there in the 19th century also suggests that the

544

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

triumph of he [i] over other competing forms was a gradual one.

Table 5. First attestations of him (subject), resumptive he, and him he in five PEs

Third person singular The use of both he and him in subject position in Pacific PEs was discussed earlier. In addition to these, there are three third person singular pronouns which represent a more radical departure from the English system: that (dat)fellow, this (dis) fellow) and him he. The earliest attestations of these are set out on the relevant map and illustrated in examples (9)-( 11), while details of the first occurrence of him in subject position are repeated here from the map Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English for the purposes of comparison. (9) NSW 1826 Bael black pellow hurt dat; dat pellow no good (Dawson 1830: 85)

VAN SOL PAP

(10) VAN -1865- you look this fellow, he no look well! (McFarlane 1873: 106) (11) TOR 1888- him he run (Haddon 1907: 251) That fellow is by far the oldest of these more radical departures from the English pronoun system, being attested in New South Wales from 1826 (where it even predates him in subject position). In the absence of any reason for supposing influence from Oceanic languages in this case, we assume that its subsequent dispersal elsewhere stems from New South Wales, in many cases via Queensland. This fellow is first attested almost forty years later in Vanuatu from where it appears to have been transmitted, almost certainly via Queensland, to neighbouring territories. In modern MPE, neither that fellow nor this fellow survive as pronouns although one or both continue to function as demonstratives. Him he is only attested in five territories, the principal varieties of MPE and Torres Straits. As there seems little doubt that this consists of him + the resumptive pronoun, the dates of first attestation of him alone in subject position, of the resumptive pronoun, and of him he in each of these territories are set out below in Table 5:

DNG TOR

1871 1884 1908 him (subj.) resumptive he 1865 1883 1877 1875 1900 1897 1910 1924 him he

1845 1886 1888

Table 5 suggests that him he was a Torres Straits innovation. This possibility needs to be treated with some caution for several reasons. First, although these islands were visited by people from a remarkably wide range of places in the latter part of the 19th century, their resident population was small and divided between the different islands. One would thus expect Torres Straits islanders to be receivers rather than donors of pidgin innovations. This is borne out by the data on him (alone) in subject position. The 1845 text contains several examples but all are attributed to a foreigner identified only as "Antonio the Black steward". No more examples are found until 1882 but these too are attributed to a foreigner, this time identified only as a South Sea islander. There are in fact no attestations attributed to Torres Straits islanders of him alone as subject prior to the first occurrence of him he. As one would not expect an innovation consisting of the combination of two elements to occur before both the latter had become established independently, the suspicion must be that the combined form him he was introduced from elsewhere. The territory whose inhabitants have had the greatest and most sustained influence on the Torres Straits islands is undoubtedly Queensland but him he is not attested there at any time. Even him in subject position is not found in Queensland until 1886, and then only sporadically but, interestingly, from both South Sea islanders and Aborigines, which may suggest that it was introduced from MPE rather than a local innovation. Finally, we must draw attention to the fact that the 1888 Torres Straits data were collected by a member of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition which, at that time, probably

Development and diffusion o/pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English

constituted the best single source of pidgin data for anywhere in the southwestern Pacific. Had data of comparable quality been collected in other neighbouring territories at about that time or a little earlier, we would almost certainly have a clearer idea of the source of him he. As things are, we are forced to speculate that either Vanuatu or the Solomons is where this innovation most probably took place. Third person plural Five different innovations for this person are found in one or more variety of MPE, of which only two are also attested in Queensland, as set out in Table 6. Table 6. Competing third person plural forms

QLD VAN SOL PAP DNG altogether he fellow himfellow them fellow all he

1858 1884 1886 mod 1884 1886 1874 1886 1910 1920 1920 1910 1914 1942 1910 1908

Altogether was clearly a Queensland innovation which was later introduced in Melanesia by returning recruits. In the earliest example altogether functions both as a pluralizer and as a pronoun:

(12) QLD -1858- Altogether Black mumkull that fellow. Altogether cramma Mary like it gin (Praed 1885: 47; "(All) These Blacks will kill them [men of another tribe]. They will take their women to be their wives"). The earliest attestations of the three 3rd person fellow pronouns are as follows: (13) SOL -1874- Hefella stofalong swafe (Raabe 1927: 116). (14) NCA -1883 Himfellow all same man-a-bush (Schuchardt 1883: 18).

545

(15) TOR 1888- I been fight them fellow (Haddon 1907: 251). He fellow was discussed above (see second person plural). It is an exclusively Solomons and Vanuatu form and is attested only within the period 1874-1897. Him fellow was also discussed above (see second person plural). The earliest attestation of this comes in data from Vanuatuans in New Caledonia reported by Schuchardt (1883). It could well, therefore, be a Vanuatu innovation. (It is first found in data from Vanuatu itself in 1886.) Apart from the territories listed in Table 6, him fellow is also attested in Kiribati (1887), Samoa (1914) and Northern Territory (1946). So far as we are aware, him fellow is no longer current in any variety of Pacific PE. Them (dem) fellow is first found in 1888 in both Western Australia and Torres Straits. The latter is likely to be its source of dispersal to Papua (1910) and Queensland (1920), the only other territories in which this form is attested. All he is first attested in German New Guinea:

(16) DNG 1908- all he sing sing "they are dancing" (Thurnwald 1908-9: 1) All he is found only marginally later in both Papua and Vanuatu. It is interesting to note that there is no use of all alone as a pronoun in any variety of MPE prior to the appearance of all he. It can therefore be deduced that this combination was initially formed from all (plural marker) + the third person singular pronoun he (rather than resumptive he discussed above). Sources of radical departures from the English pronoun system The map Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English aims to provide an indication of the relative importance of the different territories as centres for the diffusion of pronoun innovations. It does so by setting out the number of occasions each of the thirteen pronouns (including resumptive pronouns), which are identified above as representing a radical departure

546

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

from the English system, has its first, second or third earliest attestations in particular territories. This map shows that the most important source of innovations was Queensland with four, followed by New South Wales and the Solomons with two each. Of the five territories to which a single innovation is attributed, Vanuatu is of particular interest because no fewer than eight of these pronouns have either their second or third earliest attestation there. This might suggest, perhaps correctly, that Vanuatu was particularly important as a centre of rediffusion. It undoubtedly also reflects the fact that Vanuatu provided labourers for the Queensland plantations somewhat earlier than the Solomons and, in consequence, Vanuatu received returnees using Queensland pronoun innovations correspondingly earlier. In our discussion of individual pronouns in the preceding paragraphs, we have suggested that the three resumptive pronouns may have been the result of independent developments. In all other cases, we believe each pronoun to have had a single source. A more accurate picture of the relative importance of territories as sources of innovations may perhaps be obtained by omitting the resumptive pronouns, as is done in Table 7 below:

Table 7. Earliest attestations of ten radical pronoun innovations in MPE territory QLD SOL VAN NSW TOR DNG NCA PAP VIC KIR

number of pronouns documented 1st 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0

2nd 1 1 4 1 1 0 0 1 1 0

3rd 2 1 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 1

It was suggested earlier that the single feature attributed to New Caledonia might in fact be a Vanuatu innovation, while some reservations were also expressed about the origin of the feature first attested in Torres Straits. If these points are borne in mind, we believe that this gives as accurate a picture as is currently possible of the sources of the most radical pronoun innovations in Pacific PEs. The facts summarized in Table 7 are included with far more information on the map Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. All the radical pronoun innovations are set out there in chronological order for each of the main territories concerned. (Territories in which only one of these features is attested-Hawaii, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, and Kiribati-are excluded.) As can be seen, the sequence in which these pronouns are attested varies considerably from one territory to another. For example, altogether is first in German New Guinea yet last in Papua, while me fellow is first in the Solomons yet last in Torres Straits. Wherever a particular pronoun did not originate in that territory, the number of years its first appearance postdates its innovation is indicated following the plus sign (+). Thus, youfellow took 22 years to reach Torres Straits, 32 to get to Papua and more than 40 to reach German New Guinea, the Solomons and Vanuatu. What the information displayed on this map shows very clearly is that it was individual pronouns, not pronoun systems which were diffused. This is a highly significant finding which severely weakens any notion that substratum grammar was simply transferred at a single point in time. Any nondevelopmental account of pidgins will fail to be adequate for discussing questions such as substratum influence. Four of the pronouns in Table 7 and on this map are no longer current in MPE: that fellow, this fellow, he fellow, and him fellow. A clearer impression of the relative importance of the different territories as centres of diffusion of pronoun features may perhaps be given by limiting our attention to just the six 'successful' innovations, as is done in Table 8.

Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English 547

Table 8. Earliest attestations of successful radical pronoun innovations in MPE territory

number of pronouns documented

QLD SOL TOR DNG VAN PAP NSW

first 3 1 1 1 0 0 0

second 0 1 1 0 2 1 1

third 1 1 0 1 2 1 0

The likeliest routes by which these pronouns were diffused are illustrated on this map and on the map Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. While this shows that features were diffused by many different routes, it also draws attention to the central roles played by Queensland in their diffusion. Conclusions The data discussed above suggest that: 1. individual pronouns rather than complete pronoun systems get diffused;

2. diffusion takes place slowly, over several decades; 3. while there was initially no calquing of indigenous pronoun systems, some of these pidgins have gradually developed pronoun systems which more closely resemble those of local languages; 4. in all the pidgins studied, there have been very considerable changes in pronominal grammar overtime; 5. contrary to the assumptions of Keesing (1988), there was very definitely not a unitary stable Pacific Pidgin pronoun system by 1890. The diffusion of pronominal forms in the Pacific area resembles the picture we have found in tracing the spread of lexical and grammatical forms insofar as Australia exerted a strong influence on other territories in the southwestern Pacific (see the Atlas text The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler). However, in this case, the principal centre for the diffusion of features is Queensland rather than New South Wales. Furthermore, such influence is largely limited to Australia's immediate neighbours rather than to the Pacific as a whole.

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4.

Speaker is from Vanuatu. Speaker is Aboriginal person. Speaker is unidentified South Sea islander. The three letter codes used here and/or in later tables relate to the names of territories as follows: QLD = Queensland, V AN = Vanuatu, SOL = the Solomon islands, PAP = Papua, DNG = the former German New Guinea, and TOR = Torres Straits.

5.

Note that you fellow is found in Torres Straits in 1888, before any variety of MPE. Torres Straits was influenced far more by Queensland than other varieties of MPE. The fact that this form is found somewhat earlier in Papua than in other varieties of MPE may indicate that it reached Papua from the Torres Straits.

References Baker, Philip 1987 "Historical developments in Chinese Pidgin English and the nature of the relationships between the various Pidgin

Englishes of the Pacific region", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 2: 163-207. 1990 "Pacific reorientations", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 5(2): 253-69.

548

Philip Baker and Peter Muhlhiiusler

1993 "Australian influence on Melanesian Pidgin English", Te Reo 36: 3-67. Baker, Philip-Peter Miihlhausler 1990 "From business to pidgin", Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 1: 87-115. Boodle, R.G. ca. 1874 "Recollections of ministerial work in New South Wales", in: J.J. Halcombe (ed.), The emigrant and the heathen 1: 184. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. Dawson, R. 1830 The present state of Australia; (... ). London: Smith, Elder & Co. Donaldson, Tamsin 1985 "From speaking Ngiyampaa to speaking English", Aboriginal History 9(2): 126-147. Eades, Diana Kelloway 1976 The Dharawal and Dhurga languages of the New South Wales south coast. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. Eden, Charles H. 1874 My wife and I in Queensland: an eight years' experience in the above colony, with some account of Polynesian labour. London: Longman, Green & Co. Haddon, A.C. 1907 "The jargon English of Torres Straits", in: S.H. Ray, Reports of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to the Torres Straits, 3: 251-254. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Holmer, Nils M. 1983 Linguistic survey of south-eastern Queensland. Pacific Linguistics, 0-54. Jacomb, E. 1914 France and England in the New Hebrides. Melbourne: George Robertson. Keesing, Roger M. 1988 Melanesian Pidgin and the Oceanic substrate. Stanford: University Press. McFarlane, S. 1873 The story of the Lifu mission. London: James Nisbet.

Miihlhausler, Peter 1986 Pidgin and creole linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 1987 "Tracing predicate markers in Pacific Pidgin English", English Worldwide 8: 97-121. 1990 "Towards an implicational analysis of pronoun development", in: EdmondsonFeagin-Miihlhausler (eds.), Development and diversity-language varieties across time and space, 351-370. Arlington: SIL and University of Texas. Miihlhausler, Peter-R. Harre 1990 Pronouns and people: the linguistic construction of social and personal identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Nicholas, J.L. 1817 Narrative of a voyage to New Zealand. London: James Black and Son. Petrie, C.c. 1904 Tom Petrie's Reminiscences of early Queensland. Brisbane: Watson, Ferguson & Co. Praed, Mrs C. 1885 Australian life: black and white. London: Chapman and Hall. Raabe, H.E. 1927 Cannibal nights. The reminiscences of a free-lance trader. New York: Payson & Clarke Ltd. Schuchardt, Hugo 1883 "Kreolische Studien V. 'Uber das Melaneso-englische"', Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wi en (philosophisch-historische Klasse) 105: 151-61. Thurnwald, Richard 1908-09 Unpublished first Baining field notes. Tilden, B.P. 1831-32 Journal of fourth voyage to China, in ship Crusoe of Salem via Batavia, Singapore and Manila. Unpublished typescript held at the Australian National University, Canberra.

Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English

549

Relevant maps Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 56.

Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler. Map 57.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific! Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text, before the Appendixes 1. Introduction In the wake of European colonial expansion, pidginized and, in some cases, creolized varieties of their languages developed at places they frequented in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. Early documentation is not readily available for most of these contact languages but, as the research conducted for this project has revealed, a great deal of information does exist in archives and in printed materials. Although we now possess a mass of data for the Pacific region as a whole, we are far less well informed about the Atlantic and Indian Oceans which European shipping began to frequent far earlier. 2 This has several consequences:

(i) While we can trace the sequence of first attestations of particular features throughout the Pacific, we cannot always be sure that they originated in the Pacific. (ii) Where such features have not been reported for any Atlantic or Indian Ocean pidgins or creoles, we feel that it is reasonable to assume that they originated in the Pacific. (iii) Where such features are attested in the Atlantic and/or Indian Ocean as well as in the Pacific it is historically more probable that they originated in the former and were introduced later into the Pacific. However, it is possible that some may have travelled in the opposite direction, while independent parallel innovations in different parts of the world cannot be ruled out. (iv) Even where the ultimate source of a feature is known, it may have reached a particular Pacific territory by more than one route. For example, both Hawaii and New Zealand were frequently visited by ships from outside the Pacific but also had close links with, respectively,

Canton and Sydney where pidginized varieties of English had begun to develop earlier. 2. The development of pidginized varieties of English in the Pacific From the middle to the late 19th century, the words "Pidgin English" were applied exclusively to the variety spoken on the China coast. Other English-based Pacific pidgins at that time were not known by individual names, except in Melanesia where the terms Beach-la-Mar and Sandalwood English were current. From the 1880s, the words "Pidgin English" were gradually extended to the latter and also to other English-based contact languages throughout the Pacific. This usage tended to obscure the identification of distinct varieties of Pidgin English (PE) and this was only partly remedied by the subsequent adoption of ethnic or locative adjectives as in Chinese Pidgin English and New Guinea Pidgin English. For a discussion of the problem of naming and distinguishing different varieties of Pidgin English, see Milhlhliusler (1985, 1986a). Although it was recognised that ships' crews involved in whaling and trade in sandalwood, trepang and pearls played a major role in the diffusion of PE in the Pacific, the pidgins themselves and their interrelationships attracted little attention from linguists until comparatively recent times. Exceptionally, Schuchardt collected small amounts of data from a variety of different sources through correspondence, and this enabled him to make some useful comments and observations (1883, 1889). Reinecke (1937) provided a review of much of the available literature but did not distinguish clearly between varieties. Hall (1943) was able to show that one variety of Aboriginal Pidgin English was a quite separate pidgin from Melanesian PE.

552

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Hall (1961), Wurm (1971) and Hancock (1971) were among the first to indicate the relationships among some of the main varieties of Pacific PE. Hall regarded "South Seas PE" and Chinese Pidgin English (CPE) as essentially independent developments whereas both Wurm and Hancock took the view that all Pacific PEs were derived from CPE. None of these classifications was based primarily on an examination of historical data. Work on investigating the history of individual varieties of Pacific PE may be said to have begun in earnest with Clark on New Zealand PE (1978; 1990) and Bislama (1979), and Miihlhausler (1978) on Samoan Plantation Pidgin and its contribution to New Guinea PE. Ever since the publication of these articles, the group of related pidgins known collectively as Melanesian PE (MPE) have remained at the forefront of historical and linguistic research on Pacific PE. Although MPE originated somewhat later than other pidgins of the region, it is appropriate to begin this investigation of the diffusion of PE in the Pacific with MPE because this is now well documented and will facilitate the subsequent discussion of diffusion elsewhere in the region.

3. Melanesian Pidgin English Throughout this article, MPE is used as an umbrella term for all varieties of PE attested at any time in the Loyalty islands, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, the Solomon islands, and Papua New Guinea. (The latter is treated as two entities, Papua and the former German colony of New Guinea, because these have different colonial histories.) Clark's (1979) work on Bislama, the Vanuatu variety of MPE, represented a major advance because it was founded on a considerable body of historical and documentary evidence and because he took account of data from many different territories, in the Atlantic as well as the Pacific. The bulk of his article was devoted to an examination of the distribution of 30 grammatical and lexical items among eleven English lexifier pidgins and creoles of the Pacific. His main conclusions may be summarized as follows: 3

1. What he termed "South Seas Jargon" (SSJ), "[a] foreigner-talklbroken language system", is documented from the 1830s and may have "taken shape" up to thirty years earlier "among scattered speakers, particularly those from Hawaii, Tahiti and New Zealand". 2. "The foreigner-talk conventions were either universal ones, or derived from other pidgin and creole traditions ... " CPE "was one source, but... a hypothetical 18th-century nautical jargon may also have been involved". 3. SSJ "was also the basis of Australian Aboriginal [P]idgin [English]". 4. SSJ was introduced into southern Melanesia in the 1840s where "it achieved a more advanced level of elaboration and stability". 5. For at least three decades from the 1840s "there appears to have been a significant influence [on SSJ] from Australian Aboriginal pidgin". 6. "In the 1860s, it was taken to the plantations of Queensland and Fiji by Melanesian indentured labourers, and there underwent a period of rapid development." 7. "By the 1870s it can be recognized as an early form of Melanesian pidgin [English]" (MPE). 8. In the later 1870s, labourers from Vanuatu and the Solomons took early MPE to Samoa "where it was learned by men from New Britain and New Ireland. Later, under conditions of relative isolation, New Guinea Pidgin developed its somewhat distinctive lexicon and structure." The historical relations between the eleven pidgins and creoles investigated by Clark are summarized in Figure 1.4 (For Figure 1 see Appendix 1.) Baker (1987) investigated the history of 34 salient features of CPE and the extent of their occurrence in other Pacific PEs. He found only four of these (discussed further below) that might have been introduced from CPE into the latter, thus implying that CPE was a less important source of features for southwestern Pacific PEs than Wurm (1971), Hancock (1971) or Clark (1979) had supposed. Baker also found some further evidence of Australian Aboriginal PE

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

influence on MPE, adding to Clark's conclusion 5 (above). Keesing's (1988) account of the origins of MPE differed from that of Clark (1979) primarily in assigning an early key early role to what he termed the central Pacific islands (the Carolines, Kiribati and Rotuma). His assumptions regarding the developmental timetable of MPE may be summarized as consisting of the following five stages: (i) a Worldwide Nautical Pidgin English (WNPE) existed by the early 19th century at the latest (1988: 4); (ii) a distinctive Pacific Nautical Pidgin English (PNPE) began to develop from WNPE in the central Pacific in the 1840s when whaling was at its height (1988: 15); (iii) PNPE was introduced southwards into New Caledonia and the Loyalties by about 1860 (1988: 25). (iv) "in the early 1860s there was a single dialect of Pacific pidgin, largely shipboard-based, which provided the linguistic input into plantations in Queensland, Samoa, New Caledonia, Fiji, the Marshalls, and other areas (1988: 53); and it was Islanders, not Europeans, who by the onset of the Labor Trade [=1863] were the fluent speakers of a developing pidgin" (1988: 41); (v) "by the late 1880s" there had emerged "a remarkably stabilized and expanded pidgin in the Pacific" (1988: 89). Keesing's timetable finds little support in a recent historical study of the earliest attestations and distribution of 107 Melanesian Pidgin English (MPE) features throughout the Pacific area which draws on pidgin data from more than 1200 publications and manuscripts collected for the present Atlas (Baker 1993).5 These data lead Baker to reject the idea that sailors reached the Pacific speaking a uniform pre-existing pidgin. His view is that what they brought with them "was 'foreigner talk' English ... embellished with words and perhaps phrases they had heard used with or by non-Europeans in places they had previously visited where English-based pidgins and creoles were already established" (1993: 7;

553

cf. Clark's conclusion 2 above). These places might have included various Atlantic and Asian ports but Baker makes the point that, from the start of the 19th century, such sailors "are likely to have had more-and more recent--experience of N[ew] S[outh] W[ales PE] than of any other pidgin or creole" (1993: 13) because Sydney was the Pacific port most frequented by ships engaged in the range of activities associated with the diffusion of PE. He demonstrates that at least 45 and perhaps as many as 71 of the 107 features reached MPE from Australia. Keesing's failure to take account of Australian PE data is thus seen as the major flaw in his argumentation. With regard to Keesing's assumed development of a distinctive PNPE in the central Pacific (his stage (ii», Baker's data reveal only three MPE lexical items which appear to have originated in that area. 4. The diffusion of PE from Australia Tables 1-4 below are largely derived from Baker (1993) but differ in two respects. First, that publication restricted attention in Australia to New South Wales and Queensland but PE data from all other Australian states and Northern Territory have been added to the relevant tables below. Secondly, the embedded relative clause, a feature which Baker concluded was not attributable to diffusion, is omitted from the following tables, giving a base total of 106. Dates of the earliest attestations of all 106 features in the different Pacific territories are set out in chronological order in Table 1. This is done strictly according to location so that where, for example, a particular feature is attributed to a Tongan in Fiji in 1832, this appears in the table as TON1835 only. But wherever, as in this example, the first attestation comes from a speaker who is not a native of the territory concerned, this is indicated by a footnote. Each feature is given a code consisting of a letter and two digits. The letters P, G and L refer to pronominal, grammatical and lexical items. Note that there and throughout this section, all territories are referred to by three-letter codes. Comments on many of the individual features in Table 1 will be found in the following sections.

554

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

For the convenience of the readers, the contents of Note 6 which lists the three-letter codes, has been included here in the text as well: CAR Caroline islands (including the Marshalls), COO Cook islands, CPE Chinese Pidgin English, DNG (former) German New Guinea, PI] Fiji (excluding Rotuma), HAW Hawaii, KIR Kiribati and Tuvalu, LOY Loyalty islands, MRQ Marquesas, NAU Nauru, NCA New Caledonia (excluding Loyalties), NOR Northern Territory, NSW New South Wales, NZE New Zealand, PAP Papua, PHI Philippines, PIT Pitcairn island, QLD Queensland, ROT Rotuma, RYU Ryukyu islands, SAM Western and American Samoa, SOL Solomons, SOU South Australia, T AH Tahiti, T AS Tasmania, TON Tonga, TOR Torres Straits islands, VAN Vanuatu, VIC Victoria, WAF Wallis and Futuna, WES Western Australia. For Table 1 see Appendix 2. Baker (1993) relates most of the 106 MPE features to one of nine contributory factors, as summarized in Table 2 and the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English. Each of these factors, and the features associated with them, will be discussed in tum. For Table 2 see Appendix 3. 4.1. Factor 1 While foreigner-talk English (FTE) has not been adequately studied, all descriptions of this phenomenon consulted (Ferguson 1975, Clyne (ed.) 1981, Miihlhausler 1986a, Romaine 1988) include the following three among its most typical features:

the preposed negator no (G01), zero copula (G02) and me 'I' (POI) As can be seen in Table 1, these are the three most widely attested pidgin features in the Pacific, each being found in about thirty territories.

4.2. Factor 2 This factor concerns features of pre-existing pidgins and creoles which sailors from Europe and America might have observed in use by or with non-Europeans at Atlantic or Asian ports they had visited and which they may have introduced into FTE when addressing Pacific peoples. The features associated with factor 2 are: too much N 'a lot of (G03) all same 'as, like' (G04) whatfor 'why' (G06) suppose 'if (G07) plenty N (G13) been completive/past marker (GIS) got 'have' (LOS) massa 'mister'7 (L06) too much (preverbal) (L07) no good 'bad' (L09) catch 'get' (LlO) savi 'know' (LlI) piccaninny 'young child' (Ll3) more better 'better' (L24) boy 'non-European adult male' (L33) too much 'a great deal' (adverb) (L41)

All but three of the above are found in one or more Atlantic pidgins and creoles. As indicated in the Introduction (above), relatively little historical research has yet been done on the latter and it is thus not certain that all these features were all established in that region earlier than in the Pacific. In general, given that colonial expansion began earlier in the Atlantic than the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, an Atlantic origin is probable, but some features may have been transmitted from East to West while others could have resulted from independent parallel innovations. The three features which look to be of nonAtlantic origin are boy (L33), suppose (G07) and all same (G04). The word boy is found, in a variety of spellings and applied to males performing a range of menial tasks, in Portuguese texts from Asia since 1511 (Dalgado 1919-21 )-long before the British reached India. Its ultimate origin is Hindustani bhoi "a chair porter (generally pro-

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

nounced 'boy' by European ladies)" (Forbes 1859). As Forbes' gloss implies, it was readily assimilated as an additional sense of the phonetically similar English word by Anglophones, and was no doubt initially diffused by employees ofthe British East India Company. Suppose 'if is not currently known to occur in any Atlantic pidgin or creole but is found in the Comoro islands (Indian Ocean) in 1842 (Richards 1849: 459). Evidence of all same in the sense of 'as, like' in the Atlantic region is marginal (Baker 1993: 33, footnote) but it is attested in both the Comoro (Holman 1834: 3.11) and Nicobar islands (Roberts 1834: 217) in ca. 1830. Taken together with their even earlier occurrences in CPE, these Indian Ocean attestations suggest that both suppose and all same may have originated in Asian ports. 4.3. Factor 3 In their early encounters with Pacific peoples, Anglophone sailors acquired some important words from local languages which they employed elsewhere in the expectation or hope that they would be understood on other islands. In this way, they diffused them more widely. Five of the features in Table 1 are associated with Factor 3: tayo 'friend' (L02)

matee) 'kill'l'die' (L03) kanaka 'Pacific islander' (L08; see 5.2. below) ta(m)bu 'taboo; sacred' (Ll5) kaikai 'eat; food' (Ll6) All these are of Austronesian origin. 4.4. Factor 4 PE data are found in New South Wales from the end of the 18th century and, by the 1820s, this pidgin was well established. From then on, it was a potential source of features which visiting sailors might witness being used with or by the indigenous population, on which they might draw in their subsequent linguistic encounters with Pacific islanders. The thirteen features listed below sewm to have been diffused in the Pacific

555

in this way. In each case, they are first attested in Australia and are found in one or more other Pacific territories before their first appearance in MPE. Thus they all reached Melanesia, directly or indirectly, from Australia. 8 plenty 'very' (GlO) the transitive suffix -Vm (G 11) plenty (preverbal) (GI6) plenty (adverb) (G 17) belong (genitive) (G 18) make -Vm (NP) VP (GI9) blackfellow (Ll2) whitefellow (Ll9) all about 'everywhere' (L20) sugar bag 'honeycomb' (L29) walkabout 'wander' (L30) grass 'hair, plumage, grass' (L39) cranky 'crazy' (L43)

Several of the above require individual comment. Although plenty is well attested in Atlantic pidgins and creoles as a quantifier (G 13; see 4.2 above), its other three functions as an intensifier (G 10), pre verb (G 16), and postposed adverb (G 17) appear, on present evidence, to be found only in Pacific PEs. Even if GI0, G16 or G17 should tum out to exist in the Atlantic region, their absence at any time in CPE, historically the first potential Pacific recipient of Atlantic features, might nevertheless suggest that their early occurrence in Australia was the result of independent parallel innovation rather than transmission. The dates for belong (G 18), the genitive marker, 9 relate to all its variants. For half a century following its first appearance in New South Wales, the most frequently encountered spelling is belonging to with belong in ' a, belonging and, slightly later, belonga as the main variants. The first occurrence of belong alone in this role comes from Lifu in 1864. (1) plenty man belong Ukenizo speak me (McFarlane 1873: 149).

556

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

This form is then found in NCA (in 1865) and in VAN (four different islands in the period 186971) before being attested in Queensland in 1876. While all these forms probably derive from New South Wales belonging to, the short belong seems to be an MPE innovation which was introduced into Queensland at a result of the Labour Trade. Among other early attestations, the following, which contains two examples and comes from the Fijian chief Cakonauto in about 1842, requires special comment: (2)

man belongen ebery place see me; me like um man belong noder place (Erskine 1853: 461)

Keesing (1988: 22) interprets (2) "as a crucial though fragmentary piece of evidence of the early appearance in Pacific pidgin of grammatical constructions that later become standard in all daughter dialects" and rejects Clark's (1979: 31) suggestion that, since this feature was already established in Australia, the Fijian chief might have acquired this "from some individual Australian". We favour Clark's interpretation, since belongen could well be merely a graphic variant of the spelling belonging, current in New South Wales in ca. 1842, and a further forty years were to pass before an unambiguous example of this genitive was to be attested in Fiji, and then from the lips of an immigrant from Vanuatu (where this feature was by then established). For the purposes of Table 1, only postverbal occurrences of him, um, 'm, etc. which are immediately followed by an NP are considered bona fide examples of the transitive suffix (G 11). Thus, (3) is regarded as such while (4) is not. (3) is attributed to an Aborigine in New South Wales in 1826 and (4) to a Hawaiian in California in 1835. massa like him black pellow (Dawson 1830: 134 'the white man likes Aborigines') (4) You - suppose one got money -lock him up in box (Dana 1869: 150) (3)

Keesing considers (4) to be an example of the transitive suffix and maintains that "the form 'him' suffixed to verbs was undoubtedly brought to the Pacific as part of the European repertoire for 'talking to natives'" (1988: 119). While Clark (1979: 16) treats this as an Atlantic feature, it is not established in any Caribbean area creole 10 and its occurrence on Herschel island (Yukon) and in American Indian pidgins is probably an entirely separate development. It thus seems unlikely that sailors brought this feature from the Atlantic to the Pacific. With regard to Keesing's remarks quoted above, one reason why sailors might have supposed that such use of him would facilitate communication with Pacific islanders is that they had heard this in New South Wales where it is first attested in the Pacific area. A number of examples of what looks like the transitive suffix, and which meet the criteria specified above, are found in CPE from 1836. Shi (1986: 77-79) was the first to observe that, in CPE, this 'suffix' occurs only with verbs which in English have a final -I, and that the graphic representation of -m which follows, as in kill him, killum, kill 'em, and so forth, is present regardless of whether or not an NP immediately follows. The source of this curious phenomenon is now thought to be a Chinese character CPE phrasebook dating from ca. 1830 in which the final consonants of English verbs ending in -I are represented by characters pronounced [lAm] (Baker 1989). It is in any case evident that CPE -m has nothing whatever to do with transitivity, nor with the transitive suffix in other Pacific varieties of PE. Only two examples of -m are known from other Pacific islands before the first attestation of this feature in MPE. One comes from Fiji and was given earlier in (1) as part of the discussion of belong (GI8). The remarks made there concerning a possible Australian link apply in this case too. There are no known later examples from Fiji. The other comes from Tonga (Wallis 1851: 161) but, significantly, the author mentions that the speaker had spent some time in Sydney. Thus all the evidence suggests that the transitive suffix

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

was a New South Wales innovation which reached MPE via Queensland. Make -m (NP) VP (G 19) is first attested in New South Wales in 1826: (5)

Debbie debbie make him boy, massa (Dawson 1830: 74; boy here is an Aboriginal verb meaning 'die').

Were it not for this and later examples, some including the alternative New South Wales transitive marker -it, the attestations of this feature elsewhere, in Kiribati and five varieties of MPE, would provide strong support for Keesing' s notion of a central Pacific 'cradle' for MPE. However, if a single origin for this structure can be assumed, the New South Wales data imply that it must have been an Aboriginal innovation. For comment on blackfellow (L 12) and whitefellow (L 19), see the Atlas text entitled Productive fellow by Philip Baker. All about (L20) and walkabout (L30) require no comment but for a detailed explanation of how sugar bag (L29) may have an originated, see Baker (1993: 38-39). Grass 'hair; plumage; grass' has often been cited as an example of the quaintness of MPE. Commenting on its use by Melanesians in Samoa, Schuchardt (1889) suggested that this might be a calque. If so, the sequence of attestations in Table 1 implies that this was originally a calque of a word in an Aboriginal language of New South Wales. Cranky (L43) is included here because it is not attested in British English in the sense of 'crazy' until 1862 (twenty years later than in New South Wales PE) . Although not found in MPE until 1900, krange exists in this sense in an indigenous language of the Loyalties and Crowley (1990: 8384) suggests that this was probably adopted from MPE in the 19th century. Two other features may also be associated with Factor 4: (a)long(a) (multipurpose preposition) (GI4) bugger up 'spoil' (L62)

557

Each of these requires individual comment. Clark (1979: 13) distinguished along (i) 'with' from along (ii) a spatial, dative, instrumental, etc. preposition. In the Atlantic area (i) occurs in a few pidgins and creoles, including both Surinam (Arends 1989: 202) and St. Kitts (Mathews 1822: 82) from the 18th century, while (ii) is not found at all. CPE similarly has only (i) but, in the southern Pacific, everywhere (a)long( a) is found, senses (i) and (ii) are both attested. Furthennore, it is not possible to distinguish between (i) and (ii) chronologically because both make their earliest appearance in the same utterance which comes from New South Wales in 1826: (6)

I been tee Cope crammer plenty belonging to store; dat put it under arm like it dis, den dat run all along creek; den me tee it no more, cos I been run along Micky, and piola William. Den when look out along William dat gone ... (Dawson 1830: 297; emphasis added; "I saw Cope steal lots of things from the store. He put them under his ann like this. Then he ran down to the creek. Then I didn't watch any longer because I ran with Micky to infonn William. When we searched with William, Cope had gone")

For the above reasons, (a)long( a) is treated as a single feature, the multipurpose preposition. In the absence of any pre-1826 Pacific texts in which (a)long(a) has only the sense of 'with', there are no strong grounds for supposing that the Australian diffused feature has an Atlantic origin. (However, CPE along may well have been introduced by sailors from the Atlantic region and be associated with Factor 2.) Bugger up 'spoil' (L62) differs from all the preceding in that it is first attested in the Torres Straits. That this is found in an academic publication (Haddon 1907), is no accident. The word was considered unprintable in works intended for the general public until much later, as the following, relating to the Solomon islands, clearly indicates:

558

(7)

Philip Baker and Peter MUhlhtiusler

S'pose you no lend him lannitch, Holy Communion he all beggar up! I think 'beggar' was the word he used (Collinson 1926: 89)

While it is not possible to prove that bugger up existed in New South Wales in the 19th century, the probability must be that it was, and that it was diffused from there to other parts of the southeastern Pacific. 4.5. Factor 5 This factor concerns the contribution that Queensland PE, spoken between Aborigines and Whites, made to MPE. From 1842, White settlers in Queensland were often already speakers of New South Wales PE which meant that Queensland PE was initially a continuation of the latter which was brought into contact with speakers of a new range of Aboriginal languages. In Queensland in the period 1842-58, well before the start of the Labour Trade in 1863, seven features have their earliest attestations anywhere. All of these are subsequently attested in MPE between 1871 and 1884, when the Labour Trade was well established, without having been recorded elsewhere outside Australia. There is thus a very clear implication that all of these were acquired by Pacific islanders working in Queensland who continued to use them when they returned to Melanesia. These seven features are: adjfellow N (G21) that fellow N (G22) this fellow N (G27) 11 altogether N (plural marker) (G28) mary 'woman' (L42) you and me (P03) altogether 'they' (P04)12

Some of the above features may reflect the influence of Aboriginal languages of Queensland but this has not yet been investigated. There are thirteen features, first found in New South Wales or another Australian state between 1817 and 1841, which are subsequently attested

in Queensland and then in MPE, without having been recorded in Micronesia or Polynesia in the intervening period: number fellow N (G25) ((a)n)other fellow N (G26) little bit (L17) devil devil (L21) sit down 'residelbe (at), (L23) bullock 'cattlelbeef (L26) look out' search for; hunt' (L27) close up 'near(by)' (L28) moon 'month' (L34) new chum (L36) salt water 'sea; coastal' (L37) first time 'ahead; formerly' (L38) my word! (L40) In each case, there is a clear implication that these words were acquired by Melanesians in Queensland. In addition to the above, there are six features, first attested in Queensland after the Labour Trade had begun but attributed to Aborigines rather than Pacific islanders, each of which is subsequently recorded in MPE. It seems likely that all of these were acquired by Melanesians while working in Queensland so these must provisionally be associated with the fifth factor. what name (pronoun) (G20) what name 'why' (G29) little fellow (L48) sing out (L52) something 'thing' (L58) might 'perhaps' (L64)

There remain two other features which might alternatively be associated with Factor 2, tomahawk (L25) and gammon "lie" (n. and v.) (L14). While tomahawk (L25) is ultimately of American Indian origin, it became established in Australian English in the early nineteenth century as the usual term for 'hatchet'. Its pattern of attestations is similar to the group of thirteen above in all but one respect: it is attested in New

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

Caledonia before Queensland. It might therefore have been diffused in Vanuatu in the course ofthe trade in sandalwood or trepang, and perhaps taken from there to Queensland. However, the fact that it is attested in Queensland at the start of the Labour Trade, five years before it is recorded in Vanuatu, leads us to think it more likely that it reached Queensland from New South Wales, and was introduced in Vanuatu by Melanesians returning from Queensland. The pattern of attestations of gammon is also similar to the group of thirteen above in all but one respect. Here, the difference is that its first appearance in PE comes from New Zealand. However, as this belongs to the thieves' slang known as "flash language" mentioned earlier, it almost certainly reached New South Wales before 182S when it is first recorded in its PE. The pattern of attestations thereafter leaves little doubt that the term was acquired by Melanesians in Queensland. The number of features associated with Factor S listed above totals 28.

4.6. Factor 6 This factor concerns features introduced into Melanesia from Micronesia and Polynesia in the middle decades of the nineteenth century in consequence of the activities of people engaged in whaling, the trepang and sandalwood trades. These are: all (plural marker) (GOS) beche-de-mer 'trepang' (LI8) bulmakau 'cattle; beef (L32) wiwi 'French (person)' (L3S) look out 'take care of (lAS) pigeon 'bird (of any kind)' (lA6) steal 'recruit by force' (LSO) resumptive he (P02)

Three of the above are first attested in Micronesia (GOS, L4S and L46) and the remaining five in Polynesia, making a total of eight. Only two of these require individual comment. The problem with all (plural) (GOS) is that any count noun preceded by all is necessarily plural

559

and it is often not possible to determine from the context whether e.g. all man is best glossed 'men', 'all men' or 'all the men'. The handful of examples from CPE, Tasmania, New South Wales and Tonga are either ambiguous or so rare as to suggest that this feature was not diffused from any of these territories. Unambiguous attestations start with Fiji, which is the reason for associating this feature with Factor 6. As it is found in all six MPE territories earlier than in Queensland there can be no doubt that it reached the latter from the former. Both beche-de-mer (LI8) and beach-la-mar (LSI; see Factor 9) derive ultimately from Portuguese bicho do mar "trepang" but their history remains to be fully investigated. In the data collected for this Atlas project, the word for 'trepang' is first found in a commercial, nonpidgin context, as beche-Ie-mer, in an issue of the Sydney Gazette published in 1811. The earliest attestations elsewhere come from Sulu in 1817, as beach Ie mar, and Hawaii in 1836 in the modem spelling beche-de-mer. Both of these are single, isolated occurrences. The word is found twice in Queensland in 188S in accounts by Pacific islanders, speaking through interpreters, of the circumstances in which they were recruited for work in Queensland. In spite of the lack of an early attestation from Melanesia, there can be little doubt that the word was introduced there with the beche-de-mer trade in the mid-19th century.

4.7. Factor 7 This factor concerns the linguistic consequences of transporting Melanesian recruits to Queensland from 1863. The pattern of attestations suggests that such recruits may have introduced into Queensland one feature associated with Factor 2, savi (LI1); two features associated with Factor 3, kanaka (L08) and kaikai (L 16); and three of those associated with the sixth factor, look out "take care of' (L4S), steal (LSO) and resumptive he (P02), a total of six. If many of the early recruits had spoken a variety of PE on arrival in Queensland, as Keesing (1988) supposes, one would expect to find a far greater number of such features attested in Queensland for the first time in

560

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

the years immediately following the start of the Labour Trade. 4.8. Factor 8 This factor concerns the extended range of contexts in which Queensland PE was employed after the start of the Labour Trade. Pacific islanders needed this to communicate with each other wherever they belonged to different ethnolinguistic groups, and in domestic and recreational contexts as well as at work, whereas the range of situations in which Queensland PE had been used between Whites and Aborigines was far more limited. One might expect a number of innovations to have resulted from this but only two were noted which postdate the start of the Labour Trade and are first attested from Pacific islanders:

verb adjfellow (G23) you fellow (P05) For further comment on these, see the Atlas text entitled Productive fellow, by Philip Baker. 4.9. Factor 9

While recruiting for Queensland continued to gather momentum, from 1865 there were also former recruits returning home with a knowledge of Queensland PE as a second or additional language. Data collected for the Atlas indicate that Queensland PE was far more developed than the varieties which were then current in Melanesia. When Queensland PE-speaking recruits returned home, they would probably have absorbed some local PE features into their more developed (Queensland) PE to create what may properly be termed MPE. The latter rapidly acquired the status of language of wider communication in an area of great linguistic diversity. This meant that, as had earlier happened in Queensland, MPE was increasingly employed between Melanesians of differing primary languages, and not merely between Melanesians and Anglophones. It also meant that some innovations which took place in MPE from 1865 might subsequently have been introduced into Queensland PE by later recruits. Factor 9 is the sum of all the linguistic conse-

quences of Pacific islanders returning to their homes in Melanesia after having worked in Queensland. There are nineteen features associated with this factor, all of which have their first attestation in Melanesia, after the start of the Labour Trade: what name (relative) (G30) finish (postposed completive) (G31) where 'who/which/that' (G32) piccaninny 'small' (LOI) man bush (man Api, etc.) (L47) calico 'cloth(es)' (L49) beach la mar 'Bislama' (L5I) small fellow (L53) yam 'year' (L54) singsing 'dance' (L55) buy 'recruit with presents' (L56) kill 'hit, strike' (L57) capsize 'pour; upset' (L59) belly 'seat of the emotions' (L60) liklik 'little' (L63) tasol 'that's all, etc.' (L65) me fellow (P06) he fellow (P07) all he 'they' (P09)

Seven of the above features are subsequently found in Queensland (G30, G31, L47, L49, L57, L59 and P06), suggesting that they were introduced by later Melanesian recruits. 4.10. Other features

There are ten features which have not been attributed to one of the above factors, each of which will be discussed below: go verb (G08) by and by (clause initial/final) (G09) come verb (GI2) by and by (preverbal marker) (G24) maski 'never mind' (L04) stop 'be (at)' (L22), number one 'best; chief (L31) calabouse 'prison' (L44) flash 'smart' (L61) him he 'he' (P08)

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

The pattern of attestations of both go verb (G08) and come verb (GI2) do not resemble any of those associated with Factors 1-9, nor are they very similar to each other. It is our impression that, in both cases, we are dealing with a mixture of independent innovation and transmission. As such, neither is a useful diagnostic feature. By and by was frequently employed in both clause initial and final position in 19th century British English. It is thus doubtful whether (G09) can properly be considered as a significant departure from natively spoken varieties of English at all, except insofar as it became the sole marker of futurity. Its use in preverbal position (G24) is, of course, a very different matter but only six examples are currently known from 19th century texts and New South Wales is the only territory in which two are recorded: (8) me bye and by come back (Troy 1985: 301; example relates to 1844) (9) Mine think it blackfellow by and by tumble down (Newland 1894-95: 47; example relates to ca. 1867). While such examples show that the incorporation of by and by within the verb phrase did not have to await the creolization of Tok Pisin, they seem to be individual innovations which failed to become established at that time. Knowlton (1967: 229) is not alone in assuming that 014 maski derives from Portuguese mas que ("but that"), but I have not found any Portuguese authors who take this view, and the word is not listed in Dalgado's comprehensive work (1919-21) (but see the Atlas text Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Pacific and western Pacific rim, by Alan Baxter). Clark (1979: 59) considers Malay meski, 'in spite of, although'" a more likely etymon, and this view is shared by Ferreira (1978). While neither of the proposed etyma is semantically very close to its usual meaning of 'never mind' in CPE, Macanese and Tok Pisin, an ultimate Malay origin is not unlikely, especially since the gap between the earliest attestations in CPE and DNG is such as to rule out the likelihood of transmission from the former to

561

the latter. The word might well have reached Macao with immigrants from Malacca taken there by the Portuguese at an early stage in the enclave's settlement (Montalto de Jesus 1902: 51). Its occurrence in DNG may be attributable to the presence of Malay speakers in German New Guinea in the 1890s (Seiler 1982). A problem with stop (L22) is that textual clues are often insufficient to determine whether it should be glossed 'remain (at)', 'reside (in/at)' or 'be (in/at)'. The dates in Table 1 relate to the first unambiguous attestations in the last sense only. While this feature might have reached Melanesia from more than one source, transmission from Queensland PE to MPE as a result of the Labour Trade was probably the most important route. Number one (L31) is familiar in modern English but it has yet to be established that it was current in this sense in metropolitan varieties before its first attestation in CPE. Transmission from CPE to DNG or other Pacific pidgins does not seem very likely; it may perhaps have been adopted into the latter independently from (nonpidginized) English. Calabouse (L44) is of ultimate Spanish (calabozo) or Portuguese (calabou{:o) origin. Leading British and American dictionaries indicate that this is first attested in English in the southeastern USA in 1792 in the spelling calaboose, while the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary additionally identifies Louisiana (French-based) Creole as the immediate source. Although it is interesting to note that four of the six territories in which the term is found before 1900 came under French control, no confirmation has yet been found that this was once current in French. We thus tentatively conclude that calabouse owes its presence in the Pacific, where it is first attested as a loanword in Tahitian (see the footnote to this item in Table 1), to American sailors, and that they and others engaged in maritime activities were reponsible for its sub-sequent introduction into Melanesia. The fact that flash (L61) is attested in both Vanuatu and the Torres Straits earlier than in Queensland and without any known occurrence in New South Wales is curious given that three items

562

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

were earlier attributed to the thieves' slang called 'flash language'. An Australian origin seems probable but remains to be established. There are two reasons for thinking it unlikely that him he (P08) really is a Torres Straits innovation. Though visited by people from a very wide range of places towards the end of the 19th century, the small resident population of the Torres Straits islands might lead one to expect that they were far more often the receivers rather than the donors of innovations. In the particular case of him he, the he is undoubtedly the resumptive pronoun, a feature first attested in Vanuatu in 1865 and not found in Torres Straits until 1886. While it thus seems highly probable that him he was a Melanesian innovation, this remains to be established. The information in Table 2 (see Appendix 3) may be rearranged to indicate the likely geographic source of the 106 MPE features, as is done in Table 3.

Table 3. Summary of MPE features by probable geographic source Atlantic/Asia (= factors 1 and 2)

19

Australia (= factors 4, 5 and 8) Polynesia (= factor 3 and part factor 6) Micronesia (= part factor 6) Melanesia (= factor 9)

45 11 2

others (discussed above) Total

12 96 10 106

While Australia emerges as the biggest single source, the extent of its influence on MPE could be even greater because quite a number of features attributed above to Atlantic/Asian, Micronesian or Polynesian sources are nevertheless recorded in New South Wales and/or Queensland earlier than in MPE. If attention is restricted simply to whether particular features are attested earlier in Australia or Melanesia, the picture which emerges is as set out in Table 4.

Table 4. Comparison of Australia and Melanesia as place of earlier attestation of MPE features Attested in Australia before Melanesia Attested in Melanesia before Australia Attested only in Melanesia, never in Australia Total

71

16 19

35 106

5. Centres of diffusion and rediffusion of PE in the Pacific Some general indication of the relative importance -or potential-of territories as centres for the (re)diffusion of the 106 MPE features can be gleaned from Table 5. However, as was emphasised above, it does not necessarily follow that the territory in which a particular feature is first attested is also the one from which it was further diffused. We examine this in more detail with the aid of the maps Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English, and Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific and by discussing the different territories individually. The first map on the map sheet entitled Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English is concerned with the nineteen features associated with Factors 1 and 2 which were potentially introduced from the Atlantic and Indian Oceans by sailors. The number of these features which had their first, second and third earliest attestations in each of these Pacific territories is shown on the map. Because one feature has its first attestation in two territories in the same year, and two other territories share the second earliest attestation of another feature, there are twenty firsts, nineteen seconds and eighteen thirds. Note that all these features are first found in Canton, Australia or New Zealand, as also are most second and third earliest attestations. Most of the other locations where these features are found second or third earliest were frequented by whalers. For further comment on this map, see the following sections on individual territories. The second map on the above map sheet is concerned with the forty-five features 13 associ-

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

ated with Factors 4, 5 and 8 (see above) all of which are thought to be Australian innovations. The number of these features which had their first, second and third earliest attestations in each of these Pacific territories is shown on the map. Because there are two cases where a feature is jointly attested first and another two where a feature is jointly attested second, one of them involving three territories, there are forty-seven firsts, forty-six seconds and forty-two thirds. This map indicates that most of these features had their second or third earliest attestations either elsewhere in Australia or in neighbouring territories involved in the Labour Trade. There will be further references to this map in the sections which follow. The third map on the above map sheet illustrates the thirty-two features associated with Factors 3, 6 and 9 (see section 4 above). Factor 3 concerns five features acquired by European/ American sailors on early voyages from Polynesian languages which they diffused more widely in the southern Pacific. Factor 6 concerns eight features which flourished in the central and southern Pacific and which were subsequently diffused in Melanesia. Factor 9 concerns nineteen features first attested in Melanesia after the start of the Labour Trade. The total number of such features is thus thirty-two. The number of these which had their first, second and third earliest attestations in each of these Pacific territories is shown on the map. Because two features have their second attestation in two territories in the same year, and because three other features are only found in two territories, there are thirty-two firsts, thirty four seconds but only twenty-seven thirds. While early attestations of these features are predictably concentrated in Melanesia, few territories are unrepresented. The map Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific and Table 5 both indicate how many of the 106 selected features have their first, second and third earliest attestations in each territory. Table 5 also indicates how many of the selected features are attested at any time in each territory while an explanation of

563

why the totals vary from 97 to 109 will be found in the note 14. The map Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific is not merely the combination of the first, second and third maps on the map sheet entitled Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English because it also includes the ten "other" features listed at the foot of Table 2 which are not immediately associable with one of the factors 1-9. Although the map Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific gives an indication of the relative importance of the different territories as centres of both innovation and (re)diffusion of features, it cannot show the routes along which features were distributed. Someand only some-indication of these routes can be found on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. The details of how this was compiled are somewhat complicated and an understanding of them is essential for the proper interpretation of the map. Our basic assumption in approaching the design of this map is that, in the sequence of attestations set out in Table I, each territory is more likely to have received a particular feature from the territory which immediately precedes it in the table than from any other. We realize that there are bound to be quite a few exceptions to this. Nevertheless, we believe that if we total every pair of sequences in Table I-that is, to take just the first entry in that table, CPE-NZE, NZE-NSW, NSW-RYU, etc. right down to SOL-DNG and DNG-TOR-the pairs which recur with the greatest frequency in the table as a whole will, if mapped, provide a reasonable guide to the principal routes along which features were carried. Conversely, sequential pairs which are found only once or twice in the entire table will tend not to represent diffusion routes and be attributable to other causes. For example, NSWRYU in the first entry in Table 1 is geographically an unlikely route and the more probable explanation is that this particular feature was carried on two (or more) routes, e.g. CPE-NZENSW ... and CPE-RYU.

564

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Table 5. Number of features having their first, second or third earliest attestation in each territory Territory no. of the 106 selected features documented first % first 15 second third all NSW 26 CPE 18 QLD 12 VAN 8 TAS 8 NZE 7 SOL 5 4 WES NCA 3 TAH 3 DNG 2 TOR 2 HAW 2 VIC 2 SOU 1 KIR 1 CAR 1 NOR 1 PAP 1 ROT 1 TON 1 MRQ PIJ COO PIT SAM RYU LOY WAF NAU - Total 109

50% 69% 14% 8% 32% 30% 5% 7% 7% 15% 2% 4% 7% 7% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 5% 10%

16 3 15 10 7 4 9 3 1 1 8 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 1 1

6 3 13 11 2 7 7 6 4 1 5 1 1 4 4 3 1 3 1 1 3

6 3 1 -

109

52 26 83 100 25 23 97 54 42 20 91 53 30 28 42 33 27 63 89 22 10 23 32 13 6 35 8 20 11 5

97

What we have plotted on the last mentioned map are the most recurrent sequential pairs which imply transmission from each territory, provided: (a)

they account for at least 10% of the tokens for that territory; and (b) they number not less than three.

In spite of these restrictions, we still have a number of reservations about some aspects of this map but these will be discussed at appropriate points within sections 5.1.-5.12. which follow. We have also not mapped a few pairs which meet the above criteria but which we believe would give an inaccurate impression. Wherever the latter applies, these are indicated in footnotes together with reasons for their omission.

5.1. Canton (CPE) As indicated in Table 5, only 26 of the 106 features in Table 1 are attested in CPE. However, of these 26, no fewer than 18-69%-are first recorded in the Pacific in CPE. The breakdown of these features by the (MPE) formative factors summarized in Table 2 is as follows: factor 1 (GOI-02) factor 2 (G03-04, G06-07, L05-07, LlO-ll, L33) factor 6 (G05) factor 9 (LO 1) others (G08-09, L04, L31)

2 10 1 1

1 18

Factors 1 and 2 are attributed, respectively, to 'foreigner talk' English and to pre-existing Atlantic and Asian pidgins and creoles. Both groups of features were diffused in the Pacific by sailors. They have their first Pacific attestation in CPE primarily because Canton was the first Pacific port to be frequented by European shipping, which in tum is responsible for the fact that CPE is by far the oldest variety of PE in the Pacific. With the possible exception of all same (G04) and suppose (G07) discussed in 4.2. above, the twelve features associated with Factors I and 2 (map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English) which are first recorded in CPE are not CPE innovations. These include two MPE features which Clark (1979) thought had originated in CPE but which were rejected by Baker (1987)-got (L05) and catch (LlO)-as well as what for (G06) which the latter considered to be a CPE innovation but which is

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

now thought to have first appeared in the Atlantic. Given that voyages between Canton and the south-western Pacific were very rare prior to the breaking of the East India Company's monopoly of British trade with China in the 1830s, there is no reason to think that any of the twelve features associated with factors 1 and 2 were rediffused elsewhere from China, with the possible exception of Hawaiian PE. Thus the routes linking CPE with NSW and NZE on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific should perhaps better be interpreted as meaning that they reached the latter territories on ships which had visited Atlantic and Asian ports. Each of the six remaining features which have their earliest Pacific attestation in CPE requires individual discussion: All (plural; G05; see 4.6. above) is found sporadically in CPE from 1784. As it is attested in both Tasmania and NSW before direct shipping links were established between Canton and Australia, its presence in the latter is more likely to be a separate, parallel innovation. Use of (words meaning) 'all' as a sporadic marker of plurality is not limited to the Pacific, cf French-derived toute in the 18th century Creole of Guadeloupe (HazaelMassieux 1991: 73). With the exception of CPE, Hawaii and the Marquesas, piccaninny 'small' (LO 1) is attested at about the same time or appreciably later than piccaninny 'young child' (Ll3). Since it is in the sense of 'young child' that piccaninny first became established in English lexifier Atlantic pidgins and creoles, it is reasonable to assume (a) that Ll3 was diffused in the Pacific by sailors, and (b) that, in most territories, L01 derives from Ll3 .16 However, the absence of Ll3 at any time in CPE, Hawaii and the Marquesas suggests that piccaninny 'small' reached them by a different route. The probability is that L01 reached CPE via Macanese, and was subsequently transmitted to Hawaii. This suggests a link between CPE and Hawaii which will be examined below. Note that piccaninny 'small' is not attested in CPE after 1750 nor in Hawaii later than 1843 (Julian Roberts p.c.) so is unlikely to have been diffused

565

from either of these territories elsewhere in the Pacific (with the exception of the Marquesas; see below). As indicated above (4.10.), maski (L04) was probably separately adopted from Malay by CPE and New Guinea Pidgin, rather than transmitted from CPE to New Guinea. Go VERB (G08) is attested in CPE and Tasmania before direct shipping links were established between Canton and Australia. This feature is thus unlikely to have been transmitted from CPE to the southwestern Pacific and, as was indicated in 4.10. (above), may well have arisen independently in several different territories. By and by is found in both clause initial and final position (G09) with such frequency in 19th century English narratives that its use in pidgin texts of that period can scarcely be considered an innovation (cf 4.10. above). As mentioned in 4.10. (above) number one 'best, chief' (L31) is familiar in modem English but is suspected of having been a CPE innovation. Transmission from CPE to other Pacific pidgins does not seem very likely given the gap of 50 years before it is recorded elsewhere and its absence from NSW and Queensland at any time; its presence in the Carolines, Hawaii, etc. is probably due to later, independent adoption from (non-pidginized) English. The three features which have their second earliest Pacific attestation in CPE (map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English) all marginally postdate their first appearance in New South Wales: no good (L09), me (POI) and more better (L24). However, since (a) all occur in CPE before there was direct sea travel between Australia and Canton, and (b) they are associated with factors 1 and 2, it seems likely that all three reached CPE independently of New South Wales. (The unusually tardy appearance of me in CPE is discussed in the separate Atlas text entitled The development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English, by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler.) Of the three features which have their third earliest Pacific attestation in CPE, (a) long (G14) is discussed in 4.4. (above) while by and by as a

566

Philip Baker and Peter Muhlhiiusler

preverbal marker (G24) occurs so rarely anywhere in the Pacific in the nineteenth century that it is not a serious candidate for rediffusion (see 4.10. above). The remaining feature is resumptive he (P02) which occurs only sporadically in CPE from 1841 but, since this postdates its appearance in New Zealand and Hawaii, it might conceivably have been introduced by shipping links. Although CPE has the highest percentage of first attestations in Table 5, the above review suggests that it was not an important centre for the rediffusion of pidgin features to other territories, with the possible exception of Hawaii to which we now tum. 5.2. Hawaii There were two separate opportunites for Hawaiian PE to be influenced by CPE. The first occurred in the last two decades of the 18th century as the result of ships involved in the USA-China fur trade calling at Hawaii. The one feature in Table 1 which can confidently be attributed to this is piccaninny "small" (L01), attested in Hawaii from 1791 (but not after 1865; Julian Roberts, p.c.). Not in that table but attested in Hawaii from the same year and still current is kaukau 'food; eat', apparently from CPE chowchow. (Both kaukau and piccaninny appear to have become established in a pidginized variety of Hawaiian through which they were further diffused to the Marquesas (Roberts 1993) and Alaska (Drechsel-Makuakane 1982).) The etymology of chowchow has never been reliably established. Schuchardt (1883) was inelined to derive this from English chaw rather than from Chinese. The earliest occurrence of the word is: (10)

The Chinese dressed their portion [of food] differently [from the rest of the sailors], making a mixture with rice, and other things, which they call Chow Chow (Keate 1788: 123). A Chinese origin thus seems probable. Cantonese ch' aau 'to fry quickly (with little oil' seems a possible etymon, cf ch' aau ts' oi 'sauted [sic] vegetables' (Meyer-Wempe 1947).

Ignoring features associated with 'foreigner talk' English, there are two of Atlantic provenance which have their first Pacific attestation in CPE and which are found sufficiently early in Hawaii to suggest that their presence may date from the fur trade era: all same (G04) from ca.1805 and suppose (G07) from 1820. The second period during which there was the potential for CPE to influence Hawaiian PE (and its successor Hawaiian Creole English) begins in the latter part of the 19th century as a consequence of Chinese immigration. Probably only a small minority of immigrants would have had prior exposure to CPE but such people would no doubt have sought to use this in their new country. The one feature in Table 1 which can reliably be attributed to this is savvy 'know' (LlI), found in HPE from 1879. Two other CPE features, not in the table, which were probably introduced by Chinese immigrants are look-see (from 1924) and the suffix -side as in topside (from 1934). Apart from CPE, as correctly reflected on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific, it is not evident that HPE was significantly influenced by any other variety of Pacific PE. Only two features in Table 1 have their first attestation in HPE, kanaka 'Pacific islander' (L08) and heche de mer 'trepang'(Ll8). Kanaka, from the Hawaiian word for 'person', is subsequently attested in thirteen other Pacific territories and was undoubtedly diffused by sailors. Beche-de-mer is discussed in 4.6. (above). Not surprisingly, the frequency of sequential pairs implying transmission of features from HPE is very low. Only one meets the criteria set out above and even this has been ex-eluded on the grounds of improbability .18 However, we had added HAW-MRQ, which scores 3 and just misses the 10% criterion, on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific, because of the additional evidence from Roberts (forthcoming) that pidginized Hawaiian was transmitted on this route. 5.3. Australia The important contribution of NSW and Queensland PE to Melanesian PE was indicated in section

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

4 (above) while the diffusion of pidgin features from these States to other parts of Australia is discussed in a separate article in this volume (The diffusion of Pidgin English in Australia, by Peter Miihlhausler). In this section, we examine only those features which have their earliest Pacific attestation in one of the Australian States (including Northern Territory) and the extent to which these were diffused elsewhere in the Pacific.

5.3 .1. New South Wales Of the twenty-six MPE features which have their first Pacific attestations in New South Wales, the twenty represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English are local innovations: (a)long(a) (GI4; see 4.4 above) belong (genitive; G18; see 4.4 above) blackfellow (LI2) bullock (L26) close up (L28) cranky (L43; see 4.4 above) devil devil (L21) first time (L38) grass (L39; see 4.4 above) look out 'search for' (L27) make -m (NP) VP (GI9; see 4.4. above) new chum (L36) preverbal plenty (G 16) postposed adverbial plenty (G 17) salt water (L37) sing out (L52) sit down (L23) sugar bag (L29) tomahawk (L25) walkabout (L30) All the above features subsequently occur in MPE and elsewhere in Australia. Sixteen of them-all but bullock, new chum, sit down and tomahawk -are also found later in other Pacific territories, indicating the importance of NSW as a centre of diffusion. The islands where the largest number of these sixteen features are attested subsequently

567

are: Torres Straits (eleven), Samoa (seven), Kiribati (five), Carolines and Fiji (four each). The remaining six NSW features are preverbal by and by (G24) and the five represented on the first map on the map sheet entitled Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English: me 'I' (POI), attributed to 'foreignertalk' English, and four established in Atlantic pidgins and creoles:

been (GI5) more better (L24) no good (L09) plenty N (G13) The fact that the latter four occur in the Atlantic does not rule out the possibility that one or more of them may have been independently innovated in Australia, as is perhaps particularly likely in the case of been which would have occurred frequently as an auxiliary verb in the English to which Aborigines were exposed. The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates an important twoway flow of features between NSW and T AS. It also suggests that NZE may have been a significant source for NSW, and shows that the two territories which received most features immediately following their appearance in NSW were QLD and WES. In spite of this, the impression that emerges from this map is that NSW was less important as a centre of diffusion than one would expect, given that fully one quarter of the 106 features have their earliest Pacific attestion in NSW, as was indicateded above. This is partly due to the wide range of territories where features were next attested following their appearance in NSW. Those not qualifying for inclusion on the map include five features for NSW-VIC, and three features each for NSW-FIJ, NSW-CPE, NSW-SOU, NSWNZE and NSW-SAM.

5.3.2. Queensland Twelve features have their earliest attestations in Queensland (see the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English)

568

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhtiusler

and all of them are exclusively Pacific innovations: altogether 'they' (P04) altogether 'all'/plural (G28) adj.fellow N (G21) little fellow N (lA8) mary (lA2) might (L64) something 'thing' (L58) that fellow N (G22) this fellow N (G27) what name 'why' (G29) you and me (P03) you fellow (P05)

The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates the importance of QLD as a centre both for the diffusion of local innovations and for the rediffusion to the west, north and east of features previously attested further south. 5.3.3. Tasmania Eight features have their first attestation in Tasmania but two of them, plenty N (G13) and walkabout (L30), also occur in the same year in New South Wales and were discussed above. Regarding a third feature, the come VERB structure (GI2), Baker (1993: 52) wrote "No clear pattern of transmission emerges from [Table I] and the probability must be that [this] developed independently in at least two and perhaps several territories". The remaining five features are all Australian innovations: 18 all about (L20) little bit (L17) -m transitive suffix (G 11) plenty 'very' (G 10) whitefellow (LI9)

Tasmania was established as a penal settlement soon after New South Wales and before any other parts of Australia came under British control. Some members of the colonial administration visited Tasmania accompanied by Aborigines from New South Wales. Three of the above first

attestations are attributed to such Aborigines (L20, L 17 and Gil) while the other two are recorded in NSW within six years. It could well be that, as and when additional early NSW data come to light, all five will tum out to be NSW rather than Tasmanian innovations. The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates a major two-way flow of features between T AS and NSW but no close links with any other territory. 5.3.4. Western Australia Of the four features which have their first Pacific attestation in Western Australia, adverbial too much (L41) occurs extensively in the Atlantic region. It is most unlikely to have been rediffused from Western Australia to either of the Pacific territories where it is next found, namely the Marquesas and the Carolines. The remaining three features all look to be Australian innovations and are represented as such on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English but, as will be seen below, there are problems concerning their subsequent diffusion:

verb adj.fellow (G23) moon (L34) what name 'who, what' (G20) The first of these is not attested elsewhere until forty-three years later in Queensland. Given the lack of direct contacts between Western Australia and Queensland, and the fact that all the many other developments concerning fellow are first found in the eastern states of Australia or in Melanesia, we are inclined to regard this as a case of independent parallel innovation. Both moon and what name 'why' are first found in the same sequence of four territories: Western AustraliaSouth Australia - Queensland - Vanuatu. While it is easy to account for the transmission of features from Western to South Australia and from Queensland to Vanuatu, it is more difficult to envisage circumstances in which they might have been diffused from the south-west of Australia to the north east. Independent innovation in the two

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

areas seems far more likely in the case of moon (phonetic and semantic similarity with month) than with what name. The frequent sequential pairs involving WES marked on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific are limited to those which reflect known transmission routes. As indicated in the preceding paragraphs, we know of no reason to suppose that any features were diffused from WES to Melanesia. 19 5.3.5. Victoria Just two features have their first attestations in VIC (see the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English) and both are Pacific innovations:

number fellow N (G25) (a(n))other fellow N (G26) The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates transmission of features between VIC and SOU in both directions and, geographically less probable, the diffusion of features from VIC to both QLD and NOR.20

569

The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates that SOU participated in a two-way flow of features extending from WES to VIC. It also suggests, somewhat unexpectedly, that SOU may have received some features from NOR and diffused others to QLD. 5.3.8. Australian influence on other Pacific territories A total of forty-two features were identified above as Australian innovations (New South Wales 20, Queensland 12, Tasmania 5, Western Australia 3 and South Australia 2; note that these figures include several of the ten features listed at the foot of Table 2 which are not associated with one of the nine formative factors, and which are thus excluded from the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English). All of these features occur subsequently in MPE and most of them are also found in one or more other Pacific territories. Apart from the MPE-speaking islands, the four territories which received the greatest number of such features are:

Torres Straits islands 18 Samoa 12 Fiji 10 Kiribati 8

5.3.6. Northern Territory The only feature which has its first attestion in Northern Territory is might 'perhaps' (L64; represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English) which is also found in Queensland in the same year and was discussed above. The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific indicates that there was a two-way transmission of features between NOR and TOR, with QLD as the other main source.

No more than four of these features are known to occur in any other Pacific territory. That Torres Straits islands have the largest number may be attributed to their geographical location and the employment of former Queensland sugar plantation workers in its pearling industries. The other three were all involved in the supply and/or employment locally of plantation workers.

5.3.7. South Australia The only feature which has its first attestation in South Australia is my word! (L40; represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English), an exclamation associated with missionaries. As such, it is likely to have been introduced by them independently in several different territories.

5.4. Melanesia Of the nineteen features which have their first attestation in Melanesia, flash (L61), first recorded in the Solomons, is discussed in 4.10. above. The remaining eighteen, all represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English, comprise eight in Vanuatu, five in the Solomons, three in New

570

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Caledonia, two in the former German New Guinea and one in Papua. These are: all he (P09) beach-La-mar 'Bislama' (L51) belly (L60) buy 'recruit' (L56) calico (lA9) capsize (L59) finish (G31) he fellow (P07) kill 'hit' (L57) liklik (L63)

man bush (lA7) me fellow (P06) sing sing (L55) small fellow (L53) tasol (L65) what name 'which' (G30) where 'who/which/that' (G32) yam 'year' (L54)

Few of these features are subsequently found outside Melanesia. Four each are found in Queensland (attributable to the labour trade), Torres Straits and Northern Territory. Two are found in Samoa and Western Australia, and just one each in Fiji, Rotuma, Kiribati and Hawaii. These figures indicate that developments within Melanesia had little impact on the rest of the Pacific. The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific suggests that there was a large-scale two-way flow of features between the four territories where MPE is spoken today: PAP, DNG, SOL and VAN. While some features may indeed have been transmitted from one to the other, particularly between DNG and PAP, it has to be acknowledged that the picture presented by the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific is largely false, the probability being that most of these features were initially acquired by islanders while working in Queensland and then taken back home on completion of their contracts. It is also noticeable that there are no arrows pointing away from these territories which do not lead to each other, emphasizing the point made earlier that events within Melanesia had little

impact elsewhere in the Pacific. Historically, MPE concerns two other territories, NCA and LOY. Both are mapped as having contributed a small number of features to VAN. In the case of NCA, these may be associated with the ni-Vanuatu who were recruited for work in New Caledonia from 1867 (Munro 1990: xlvi). The figures for LOYVAN may perhaps reflect early European activity in the Loyalties and/or the fact that Loyalty islanders were among the first recruits for the Queensland plantations. In contrast to the other territories where MPE was or is spoken, NCA is shown as having diffused features outside Melanesia to SAM. It is difficult to account for this, there being no records of Samoan labourers in New Caledonia or New Caledonian labourers in Samoa. The principal source of features introduced into the MPE-speaking region was undoubtedly QLD, as indicated above. The apparent introductions from NOR and TOR are subject to some caution since both of the latter were major recipients of features from QLD at essentially the same time as QLD was diffusing features into Melanesia. The figures for other territories shown on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific as having introduced features into the MPE-speaking region-CAR, KIR, SAM. ROT and FIJ will be discussed individually in the appropriate sections below. 5.5. New Zealand Seven features have their earliest Pacific attestations in New Zealand. One of these is an Atlantic feature, piccaninny 'young child' (L13), and is represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English. (This is treated separately from piccaninny 'small' (LOl).) L13 is found in NSW just two years later so its further diffusion throughout the southwestern Pacific is not necessarily to be attributed to New Zealand. Gammon 'lie' (L14) is similarly attested in NSW soon after its first appearance in New Zealand. The latter is represented on he map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English but, for reasons discussed in 4.5. (above), this is thought to have been diffused

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

elsewhere in the southwestern Pacific primarily from New South Wales. See 4.10. (above) for discussion of stop (L22). The remaining four features, represented on the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English, are: resumptive he (P02) kaikai (Ll6) tambu (LlS) wiwi (L3S) None of these features are attested in NSW at any time but all four are subsequently found in New Caledonia, Vanuatu, the Solomons and the Marquesas. Kiribati, German New Guinea and Papua each have three of them while Fiji, Samoa, Queensland and Rotuma each have two. These findings indicate that New Zealand was quite an important centre of diffusion and suggest that some of the eleven features which have their second or third earliest Pacific attestation in New Zealand (see Table S above) may have been further diffused from there. Eleven features have either their second or third earliest Pacific attestation in New Zealand (GOI-02, 07, 09; L03, OS, 09, 24, 30, 33; POI; see Table I for details). Eight of these are associated with factors I or 2 (see the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English), of which five are found earlier in New South Wales. Collectively these features may have been introduced by shipping from outside the Pacific and/or by links with New South Wales. However, given the comments in the preceding paragraph, New Zealand may also have helped diffuse these further in the southwestern Pacific. The three remaining features are clause initial/final by and by (G09; see 4.10. above), walkabout (L30), which was undoubtedly introduced from New South Wales, and mate "kilVdie" (L03). This is also a Maori word so may not have been introduced from Tahiti where it is attested marginally earlier. In spite of the above remarks suggesting the likely early importance of New Zealand as a centre

571

of diffusion, the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific shows it as an significant source only for NSW and QLD. No other sequences are recorded more than twice, all of them involving locations frequented by whalers (RYU, HAW, MRQ and TAS). However, it must be stressed that very little early pidgin data have yet been found for NZE. 5.6. Tahiti, the Marquesas, and Tonga The three features which have their first attestations in Tahiti (see the map Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English) are Polynesian words which were recorded in accounts of some of the earliest Europeans to explore the Pacific and were thus known to some later voyagers: tayo 'friend' (L02) and mate 'kill'/, die' (L03). Along with two other Polynesian words, ta(m)bu (LlS) and kaikai (Ll6), these words are also attested early in the Marquesas and/or Tonga. Tonga is the location of just one first attestation of a Pacific feature, bulmakau (L32). Savi (LlI) is attested earlier than in Tahiti only in CPE and, given the lack of direct contact between these two locations, must be assumed to have been introduced to Tahiti by sailors. This word is next attested in the Marquesas but in the form sava which closely resembles saba recorded in Kiribati just three years later. The latter forms may conceivably have a separate, possibly Spanish origin. In all other Pacific territories, only spellings indicating the pronunciation [savi] are found. The map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific suggests that features travelled from Tahiti to both the Marquesas and the Cook islands, but there are no routes leading to Tahiti. The Marquesas are shown as the recipients of three features from HAW (though, as noted earlier, one or more of these may have arrived initially in Pidgin Hawaiian rather than in Pidgin English), and as the donors of three features to the Carolines. Tonga is very illrepresented in our data and, while there are two features attested in FH immediately after TON,

572

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

this is too few to warrant mapping (although it is a probable route).21 5.7. Kiribati, Rotuma, and the Caroline islands Keesing (1988: 15) refers to these territories collectively as the central Pacific and considers that this was where a distinctive Pacific Nautical Pidgin English (PNPE) began to develop from 'Worldwide Nautical PE'. However, each of these territories is responsible for only one first attestation: Look out 'take care of' (L45) in the Carolines, pigeon 'bird (of any kind)' (L46) in Kiribati, and steal 'recruit by force' (L50) in Rotuma. Considerably more support for Keesing's (1988) position seems to be found, at first glance, on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific where there are routes marked between CAR and both KIR and NCA (though the numbers of features are small), between KIR and VAN (and a substantial number of features), and between ROT and both SOL and NCA. Data such as these were probably the inspiration for Keesing's stages (ii) (development of PNPE in the central Pacific islands in the l840s) and (iii) (introduction of PNPE into New Caledonia and the Loyalties by 1860). What he was not aware of is that all but three of these features have their first Pacific attestation elsewhere, most often in Australia. Furthermore, the routes implied by the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific are not entirely consistent with Keesing's views in that there is no link between ROT and CAR or KIR, nor between any of his central Pacific islands and LOY, and the major route is between KIR and V AN rather than KIR and NCA. However, the features attested in NCA immediately after CAR (four) and ROT (six) do support Keesing's position to the extent that they reflect a southerly diffusion of PE features (even though, as indicated above, very few of these had originated in his "central Pacific islands") . We have no immediate explanation to offer for the fact that eight features are found in SOL immediately after their documentation in ROT.

5.8. Torres Straits islands Although technically part of Australia, we treat the Torres Straits islands as a separate entity because some of the islands are geographically closer to Papua New Guinea than to Australia. However, contrary to what might have been expected, the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific suggests that TOR has closer links with NOR, QLD and SOL than either PAP or DNG. (The scores for sequential pairs involving the latter are: PAP-TOR 7, TOR-PAP 4, DNGTOR 3 and TOR-DNG 6.) The two features which are first recorded in TOR are him he 'he' (P08; see 4.10. above) and bugger up (L62; see 4.4. above). 5.9. Samoa The contribution of Samoan Plantation PE to the PE of German New Guinea (DNG) was established by Miihlhausler (1978). Exclusively shared lexical items include at least eight Samoan words and six from languages spoken in the area around the Duke of York islands (Miihlhiiusler 1978: 89-91; 1979: 192-94). Additional support for this is to be found in the thirty-three features in Table 1 which are shared by the two pidgins: eighteen of these are found in Samoa earlier than DNG, eleven are recorded in DNG before Samoa, while four are first attested in the two territories in the same year. Some further support can be found in the six features attested in DNG immediately after SAM as noted on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. The route from SAM to SOL (five features) might be similarly attributed (cf Munro 1990: xliv PM-is the presence of workers from the non-German Solomons an established fact?) but transmission between SAM and both NCA and TOR of the same number of features seems less likely. However, the role of Loyalty and other south sea islanders in the early missio-nization of the Torres Straits needs to be investigated further. 5.10. Fiji

No Pacific features are first found in Fiji while the two which make their second appearance there, calico (L49) and bulmakau (L32), do not appear

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

to have particular significance. Looking at the 32 of the 106 features which are attested in Fiji at any time, the territories in which these are most frequently found earlier than in Fiji are New South Wales 22 times, Queensland 20 times, and Vanuatu 18 times. Apart from reflecting the importance of Australian influence on the southwestern Pacific, these figures indicate that Melanesians recruited for plantation work in Fiji probably took some PE features with them. Support for this is to be found on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific where six features documented for FIJ are next found in SOL. More than 8,000 Solomon islanders were recruited for work in Fiji in the period 1870-1911. Against this it has to be noted that a considerably larger number of workers were recruited in Vanuatu during much the same period yet there are no FIJ-VAN sequential pairs. There are also five features attested in both NOR22 and TOR immediately after their appearance in SAM but neither seems a likely diffusion route. 5.11. The Ryukyu islands In the small amount of data from the Ryukyu islands, only eight of the 106 features in Table 1 are recorded. Of these, seven have their first Pacific attestation in ePE while the remaining one, plenty N (G 13), is found in ePE just six years later than in the Ryukyu islands. It thus appears that Ryukyu PE, attested between 1816 and 1853 only, was strongly influenced by ePE. There are insufficient data to link RYU with any other territory on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific .. 5.12. Pitcairn Our data indicate that only six of the 106 features in Table 1 are found in Pitcaimese. Five of these, found in a text dating from 1821 and associated with factors 1 and 2, may well have been current on the Bounty: no (GOl), zero copula (G02), what for (G06), suppose (G07) and no good (L09). The remaining feature, sing out (L52), is known only from Ross-Moverley (1964) and may well be due to more recent links with Australia. These authors also mention along-for

573

'with' which we have omitted from Table 1 because its form is somewhat different from (a )long(a) found in other territories. The glossary provided by these authors includes just two other pidgin-like features, what thing "what" and what time 'when', both of which are also found in nineteenth century ePE although direct transmission of features between these two territories at any time would seem impossible. No routes linking PIT to other territories are marked on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific because the limited data do not justify this. PIT was isolated from the rest of the world until the 1820s, since when it has extended its domain to Norfolk island but this is not represented on the map. 6. Lexical, grammatical and pronominal features In Table 1, each of the 106 selected features was given a reference number with an initial G, L or P according to whether it was a grammatical, lexical or pronominal feature. Thus far, features of all three categories have been discussed collectively. In Table 6 the 106 features are subdivided both by category and by the nine factors identified above. For Table 6 see Appendix 4. As the nine factors are numbered in chronological sequence, it can be seen that the grammatical features tended to be first attested comparatively early (23 out of 32 associated with factors 1-5), the pronominal features tended to be first attested comparatively late (8 out of 9 associated with factors 5-9) whereas the first attestations of the lexical features are fairly evenly spread throughout. A summary of the number of first attestations of all 106 features, subdivided into grammatical, lexical and pronominal categories, is provided in Table 7. From this, it can be seen that first attestations belonging to all three categories occurred in only three territories-NSW, QLD and SOL. In seven other territories there were first attestations of features belonging to two categories - ePE, VAN, NZE, TAS, WES, TOR and DNG. For Table 7 see Appendix 4. Lexical features and grammatical items will be further examined in the next two sections. A more

574

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

detailed examination of the pronominal features will be found in a separate Atlas text, The development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English, by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. 7. Lexical features Table 6 shows that the distribution of lexical features among the various factors differs from grammatical and pronominal features in two minor and one major respect. The minor differences are that there are no lexical features in the sample attributed to either foreigner talk (factor 1) or to Queensland after the start of the Labour Trade (factor 8). The major difference is that the features acquired by Anglophone sailors in their early encounters with Pacific peoples (factor 3) were exclusively lexical items. The map Grammatical and lexical innovations in Pidgin English and Table 8 set out the number of lexical items attested first, secondly or thirdly in each of the territories. Table 8 also indicates how the number of lexical items so attested compares with the total number of features correspondingly attested in these locations. Overall, 65 of the total of 106 features examined in this article (61 %) are lexical while the remaining 41 (39%) are grammatical or pronominal. The proportion of lexical items is significantly lower than this-50%-in features first attested in CPE and in Australia as a whole, indicating their importance as centres of diffusion of grammatical and/or pronominal features. Within Australia, the proportion of lexical items is unusually low among features first attested in Queensland-33% -although at or above the average among those attested there second or third earliest. This reflects Queensland's dual role as innovator of grammatical and pronominal forms, and as centre for the further diffusion of lexical and other items first attested elsewhere in the region. The proportion of lexical among total features first attested in MPE is about average whereas in all other territories the items first attested are almost exclusively lexical. Thirteen items are first attested in Melanesia, six of them in Vanuatu. Five of these are

subsequently attested in QLD but not in NSW. It may be worth noting that NCA is quite well represented in Table 8. Since very limited PE data are known from New Caledonia, this could indicate that it was once an important link in the lexical diffusion network. 28 items are first documented in Australia, most of them in NSW. The majority of these have their first non-Australian attestation in Melanesia: eleven in V AN, seven in SOL, two in DNG, and one in NCA. Of the other seven, two each are first found outside Australia in CPE, NZE and SAM while the other is next attested in MRQ. Of the nine items first attested in CPE, one is subsequently attested only in DNG (see discussion of maski in 4.10. above). The others are all widely diffused throughout the Pacific. Four of these, like three of the items first attested in NZE, look to have been diffused to MPE from Australia. Of the lexical items first attested in TAH, HAW, TON, CAR, KIR and ROT, one is documented in QLD before Melanesia, while four are found in Melanesia earlier than in QLD and are not subsequently attested in NSW. Collectively, the above signal the importance of Australia as a centre for the diffusion of lexical items throughout the southwestern Pacific. They also indicate that the Labour Trade provided for the two-way flow of vocabulary items, at least nine words having been introduced into QLD from Melanesia. Two territories which might be expected to have played a greater role in the diffusion of PE in the Pacific than is apparent from Table 8 are Hawaii and Fiji. The fact that, throughout much of the 19th century, Pidgin Hawaiian and Pidgin Fijian, respectively, were the lingue franche of their plantations (Roberts forthcoming, Siegel 1986) may well account for this. Unfortunately, the early documentation we have for many of the Polynesian and Micronesian territories is insufficient for the routes of lexical diffusion among them to be accurately traced.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

Table 8. Number of the 65 lexical features found first, secondly or thirdly in each territory (with total number of the 106 selected features in brackets) territol)'

no. of the 65 selected features documented

first CPE RYU

9 (18) (0)

o

Australia23 16 (26) NSW 4 (12) QLD TAS 4 (8) WES 2 (4) SOU 1 (1) TOR 1 (2) o (1) NOR VIC !Lill 28 (56) sltotal :MPE VAN NCA SOL DNG PAP illY sltotal Others NZE TAR HAW CAR KIR ROT TON

MRQ PIJ COO SAM sltotal

6 (8) 3 (3) 2 (5) 1 (2) 1 (1) Q.....JID 13 (19)

1 (3) (0)

o 8 12 2 1 2 2 2

(16) (15) (7)

(3) (3) (4) (2)

Lru

30 (53) 4 1 6 5

2 (7)

(4) (1)

(1)

(0) (0) o (0) Q.....JID 15 (16)

L.@

26 (37)

18 (31)

1 1

1

2 (6) 8 (13) 2 (2) 5 (6) 3 (4) 1 (1) 1 (1)

(1)

3

(1) (1)

0 (3) 1 (3)

Q.....JID 16 (29)

(7)

(1)

third

5(11) 4 (4) 4 (7) 3 (5) 1 (3)

o

(10) (1) (9) (8)

(3) (2)

6 3 2 1 1 1 0 0

second

(4) 2 (2) 2 (3) 1 (1) 0 (0) 3 (4) 2 (3) 1 (1) Q.....JID 16 (23)

~

1 (1)

1 1 0 1 1 3 0

o

(1) (3) (0) (1) (1)

(3) (0) (0)

L®. 14 (23)

8. Grammatical features Our total of 106 comparative features includes 32 diagnostic grammatical items. All of them are

575

documented in one or more variety of MPE, past or present. Full details of the earliest and subsequent attestations of these items was given in Table 1 (see Appendix 2) where they are numbered G01-G32. Details of the number of these grammatical features which have their first, second or third earliest attestation in each territory are set out in Table 9 where the total number of these features found there at any time is also given. Note that NSW and T AS are jointly first in one case (G13 in Table 1). This is scored as 0.5 in both the firsts and seconds columns in Table 9. (As there is one feature which is found in only two locations, the total in the thirds column is 31 in that table.) If one compares Tables 8 and 9, CPE and Australia account for more than half of the first attestations of lexical features and the overwhelming majority of grammatical features. The MPE-speaking territories account for 20% of the first attestations of lexical features but less than 10% of grammatical features. More than a quarter of the lexical items are first documented in the remaining territories but not one grammatical feature has its first occurrence in any of these. The overall impression given by Table 9 is that Australia and the China coast played the dominant role in innovating and diffusing grammatical features in the Pacific. This impression is arguably at least partially misleading on two counts. First, as was indicated earlier, features which originated outside the Pacific where not necessarily diffused from the first Pacific territory in which they are attested. Secondly, by treating each of the component parts of Australia as a separate entity, Table 9 gives less information about the transmission of features to and between the Pacific islands. With regard to the first point, a more accurate view of the centres of innovation and diffusion of grammatical features might be obtained if we were to eliminate seven associated with 'Foreigner Talk' English and Atlantic pidgins and creoles. 24 These are: G01 no G02 zero copula G03 too much NOUN

576

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

G04 all same G06whatfor G07 suppose G13 plenty NOUN

We are also inclined to disregard three features thought to have originated independently in two or more territories (see 4.10. above): G08goVERB G09 by and by (in clause initial or final position)25 G 12 come VERB

We can take care of the second point by treating Australia as a single entity. The combined effect of the above changes, reducing the number of grammatical features to 22, is displayed on the map Grammatical and lexical innovations in Pidgin English. This shows CPE with a very much reduced role in the diffusion of grammatical features, the only attributed to this source being GOS all (plural marker). Australia remains the dominant grammatical influence on Pacific PE and the source of 18 of the 22 features. VAN and SOL are the sources of the remaining three grammatical features but, together with DNG and NCA, these are the locations of 11 second- and 14 thirdearliest attestations. Among the remaining territories, HAW, NZE and PIT score less well than in Table 9 which suggests that their grammatical items in that table were largely or exclusively introduced from outside the Pacific. Against this, a wider range of other territories is shown to have received grammatical features early in their diffusion from Australia. 9. Summary and conclusions In this article, we have drawn on data from more than 1200 different sources. We are very conscious of the uneven spread of these data, in terms of both quality and quantity, due to the paucity of documentation available for Micronesia and much of Polynesia. While we hope that more data will become available from these territories in the coming years, particularly from unpublished

sources, we do not believe that these will significantly alter the overall picture presented here so far as the diffusion of features which originated within the Pacific is concerned. There is, however, an urgent need for historical research to be done on Atlantic and Indian Ocean pidgins and creoles in order to determine which features originated there and were subsequently transmitted to the Pacific. The notion that there was once a 'Worldwide Nautical Pidgin English' (WNPE), to which Keesing (1988; see Section 3 above) and Goodman (1985) among others subscribe, is largely based on (1) the know ledge that some features of Pacific PE (notably the 19 which were associated with Factors 1 and 2 in section 4 above) exist in Atlantic pidgins and creoles, and (2) the assumption that these were established in the Atlantic region prior to their appearance in the Pacific. While (2) may well tum out to be correct for most and perhaps all of those features, we do not believe that predominantly anglophone crews sailed into the Pacific with WNPE at their disposal for use with non-anglophones. We take the view "that what sailors actually used in addressing Pacific peoples was 'foreigner talk' English [FTE] embellished with words and phrases from preexisting English-based pidgins and creoles which they had heard used by or with non-Europeans in Atlantic or Asian ports" (Baker 1993: 60).

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

Table 9. Number of selected grammatical features documented first, secondly or thirdly in each territory together with total number of such features attested in each territory

CPE

no. of the 32 selected features documented first second third total (at an~ time) 3

14

8.5 4.5 3 2 2 1 1

4

23 13 31 25 17 20 17 26

22

11

2 1

2 2 2

4 2 2

3

6

8

2 1 1

3

9

Australia NSW 6.5 TAS 4.5 QLD 5 WES 2 VIC 2 SOU TOR NOR sltotal 20 MPE VAN SOL DNG PAP NCA illY sltotal

4 1 1

1

11

Others HAW NZE KIR SAM RYU CAR PIT

2 2 1 1

FIJ ROT TAR MRQ COO TON WAF sltotal Total

32 32 29 29 19

32

1

2

32

31

6 8 17 15 5 15 4 13 10 8 7 7 6 6

577

This article has added to what is currently known about the circumstances in which pidginized varieties of English came to be extensively used throughout the Pacific in other ways, most of which can be linked to later stages in Keesing's developmental timetable, which was summarized earlier in Section 3. Keesing's concept of a 'Pacific Nautical Pidgin English' (PNPE), developing in the central Pacific islands from the 1840s, was examined and rejected. From the start of European settlement, Australia was always the most important influence on the way sailors addressed Pacific islanders. This is because the Sydney area of New South Wales was the first place in the Pacific where the continuity of interaction needed for the development of a stable, English-based pidgin existed. 26 As this was also the area visited with the greatest frequency in the Pacific by ships from Europe and North America, its pidgin (NSW) was not only the recipient of more features from pre-existing pidgins and creoles of the Atlantic region and Asia than other pidgins which were subsequently to develop in the southwestern Pacific, but it was also an important donor of features to the latter. The features examined and discussed in Sections 4 and 5 amply support this view. Note also that only three MPE features with earliest attestations in the central Pacific islands were found, none of them identified by Keesing and none of them documented in the 1840s. The three are 067 look out (CAR 1853),069 pigeon (KIR 1861) and 070 steal (ROT 1869). Only the first of these provides any real measure of support for Keesing's belief that PNPE was introduced into the Loyalties and New Caledonia from the central Pacific by about 1860, in that it is subse-quently found in the latter earlier than in Vanuatu or the Solomons. 27 No significant support was found for any part of what was earlier termed Keesing's Stage (iv), that "in the early 1860s there was a single dialect of Pacific pidgin ( ... ) which provided the linguistic input into the plantations in Queensland" and that "it was Islanders, not Europeans, who by the onset of the Labor trade [= 1863] were the fluent speakers of a developing pidgin". The data examined for this article indicate, on the contrary:

578

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

(a)

There are no grounds for supposing that a single dialect of Pacific PE existed at any time. (b) Both Europeans and Aborigines were fluent speakers of QLD at the start of the Labour Trade. By 1863, QLD had existed for more than two decades-and, as a continuation of NSW, for more than six decades. (Only six features were found which appear to have been introduced into QLD from MPE (see Factor 7 in Section 4), not one of which has its first Pacific at-testation in MPE.) (c) None of the nineteen features identified as MPE innovations (see Factor 9 in Section 4), has its first attestation prior to the start of the Labour Trade. The breakdown by de-cades in which these are first found is: 1864-70 1871-80 1881-90 1891-1900 after1900

2 8 4 2 } 19

There is undoubtedly a considerable amount of Melanesian substrate influence in MPE today. This is not in conflict with the claim that MPE derives primarily from QLD. QLD is a continuation of NSW, which already included many Australian innovations that probably reflect the influence of Aboriginal languages. A thorough

investigation of the latter is one priority for the future. Since the start of the Labour Trade-and more particularly since Pacific islanders began returning home after working in QueenslandMelanesians have made MPE progressively more like their own indigenous languages, as some of the innovations in the above decade-by-decade figures indicate. We believe that this is precisely what people who acquired a pre-existing pidgin or a creole as a second or additional language, while continuing to speak their first language, have always done. The small but growing body of evidence of substrate features being incorporated into pre-existing pidgins and creoles includes Tolai influence on DNG (Mosel 1980, Miihlhausler 1986b), Bantu and Indo-Aryan influence on Mauritian Creole (Baker-Corne 1986) and Cantonese influence on CPE (Baker-Miihlhliusler 1990). In the specific case of MPE, such findings demonstrate the importance of examining all the relevant data in chronological order, from earliest to latest, rather than by working backwards, examining only the known potential source of substrate influence and seeking to match features of the pidgin to that. More generally, the identification of features in pidgins and creoles which are attributable to particular substrate languages implies that speakers of the latter played an influential role at some stage in the development of those pidgins and creoles, but it does not necessarily follow that they participated in their genesis.

Notes 1.

2. 3.

This article was written before Crowley (1993) appeared in print. We feel that our empirical investigation remains unaffected by his arguments and that comparative reconstruction combined with logical argumentation does not lend itself readily to the analysis of Pacific Pidgin English. For more recent comments on this problem, see Holm 1992. This summary ignores Clark's conclusions regarding (a) cases where "SSJ was mixed

4.

5.

macaronically with more or less pidginized forms of the local vernacular", (b) PitcairnNorfolk Creole, and (c) modem Australian creoles. Figure 1 was first published in Clark (1979: 48). The version reproduced here was redrawn for greater clarity by its author for inclusion in Baker (1993). The 107 features were selected as follows. From the MPE data collected for the Atlas project by November 1987, a list of 90

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

features which appeared to represent a significant departure from natively-spoken varieties of English was drawn up. This included most of Clark's (1979) list of 30 comparative features. Data collected subsequently and an examination of modem MPE dictionaries (Mihalic 1971, Camden 1977, Simon-Young 1978) for features typical of 19th century CPE, NSW or QLD added about a dozen more features. A further four features were suggested by Keesing (1988). 6. CAR Caroline islands (including the Marshalls), COO Cook islands, CPE Chinese Pidgin English, DNG (former) German New Guinea, FIJ Fiji (excluding Rotuma), HAW Hawaii, KIR Kiribati and Tuvalu, LOY Loyalty islands, MRQ Marquesas, NAU Nauru, NCA New Caledonia (excluding Loyalties), NOR Northern Territory, NSW New South Wales, NZE New Zealand, PAP Papua, PHI Philippines, PIT Pitcairn island, QLD Queensland, ROT Rotuma, RYU Ryukyu islands, SAM Western and American Samoa, SOL Solomons, SOU South Australia, TAH Tahiti, TAS Tasmania, TON Tonga, TOR Torres Straits islands, VAN Vanuatu, VIC Victoria, WAF Wallis and Futuna, WES Western Australia. 7. This gloss reflects the contexts of the earliest examples from the Pacific, see Baker (1993: 33). 8. Two more features, G14 (a)long(a) and L62 bugger up are added to this list below, making a total of 15 features associated with Factor 4. 9. CPE has a copula, belong, attested from 1859, but this seems to be an unrelated development. 10. From his substantial collection of early Sranan texts, Arends (p.c.) reports a single example of what looks like a transitive suffix dating from 1798. One example is obviously insufficient to prove that this was an established feature of earlier Atlantic (varieties of) PE. Clark also mentions that the transitive suffix existed "apparently in early Nigerian Pidgin ... " but we have not been

11.

12.

13. 14.

15. 16.

17 .

18.

19.

579

able to investigate this. See also Baker (1987: 182). G21, G22, G27 and all other features including the element fellow are discussed in more detail in the Atlas text entitled Productive fellow, by Philip Baker. These and all other features with a reference number beginning with P are discussed more fully in a separate Atlas text, The development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English, by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Two features (L30, L64) are first attested jointly in two territories so the total number of firsts on Map 3 is 47. In three cases, two territories are equal first, making 109 firsts and, potentially, 103 seconds but in four cases two territories, and in one case three territories, are jointly second, bringing the total to 109 seconds. This would reduce the number of thirds to 101, but four features are attested in only two territories, thus bringing the number of thirds down to 97. The number of features first attested in each territory as a percentage of all the selected features found there. Piccaninny 'small' (LO 1) is attributed to Factor 9 because, in MPE, this sense is assumed to be derived locally from piccaninny 'young child' (L13) and not to be the result of transmission from CPE or Hawaii. HAW -WES 4 has been omitted because we do not know of any grounds for supposing direct communications between these two locations. These five plus walkabout (L30), comprise the six features first attested in Tasmania on the second map on the map sheet entitled Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English. We must nevertheless place on record that there are no fewer than eight features which are attested in V AN immediately after their appearance in WES. It could be mere coincidence that these features filtered through from Eastern Australia to WES at essentially

580

20. 21.

22. 23. 24.

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

the same time as QLD became the major centre for the diffusion of features to Melanesian PE. These were probably transmitted around the coast rather than across Australia. There are in fact three features attested in WES immediately after TON but this is such an improbable diffusion route that it has been omitted from the map. Omitted from the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. One feature first attested jointly in QLD and NOR is attributed to QLD only in this table. Although attested in Atlantic pidgins and creoles, we suspect that GIS been developed independently in Australia (as indicated in 4.2 above).

25. We regard the distribution of G24 by and by (preverbal marker) as far more significant. 26. Although samples of CPE are known from 1743, there was little continuity of interaction before the late 1820s (Baker 1987). 27. Ignoring the fact that they have their earliest attestations in, respectively, New Zealand and Hawaii, 065 kaikai and 066 kanaka might also be said to provide support for this. See Table 1 for details. Although the diffusion routes displayed on the map Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific provide some evidence that features were carried from the central Pacific islands to NCA, the particular features to which Keesing drew attention had all been attested somewhat earlier in Australia and almost certainly reached VAN from QLD.

References Arends, 1. 1989 Syntactic developments in Sranan. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit. Baker, Philip 1987 "Historical developments in Chinese Pidgin English and the nature of the relationships between the various Pidgin Englishes of the Pacific region", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 2: 163-207. 1989 A provisional assessment of hUIJ mow thun yAn fan wa, a 19th century Pidgin English phrasebook written entirely in Chinese characters. Unpubl. typescript, 1989. 1993 "Australian influence on Melanesian Pidgin English", Te Reo 36: 3-67. Baker, Philip---Chris Come 1986 "Universals, substrata and the Indian Ocean creoles", in: Muysken-Smith (eds.), 163-183. Baker, Philip-Peter Miihlhausler 1990 "From business to pidgin", Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 1: 87-115.

Camden, William 1977 A descriptive dictionary, Bislama to English. Vila: Maropa Press. Clark, Ross 1978 The rise and fall of New Zealand Pidgin. Paper presented at the second New Zealand Linguistics Conference, August 1978. 1979 "In search of Beach-la-mar. Towards a history of Pacific Pidgin English", Te Reo 22: 3-64. 1990 "Pidgin English and Pidgin Maori in New Zealand", Multilingual Matters 65: 97114. Clyne, Michael (ed.) 1981 Foreigner Talk. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 28. The Hague: Mouton. Collinson, C.W. 1926 Life and laughter 'midst the cannibals. London: Hutchinson. Crowley, T. 1990 Beach-la-Mar to Bislama. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

1993 "Pre-1860 European contact in the Pacific and introduced cultural vocabulary", Australian Journal of Linguistics 13: 119-163. Dalgado, S .R. 1919-21 Glossdrio Luso-Asidtico. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade. 2 vols. Dana, Richard Henry jnr. 1869 Two years before the mast, and twentyfour years after. A personal narrative. London: Sampson Low, son & Marston. Dawson, R. 1830 The present state of Australia; (... ). London: Smith, Elder and Co. Drechsel, Emanuel J.-T. Haunai Makuakane 1982 "Hawaiian loanwords in two native American pidgins", International Journal of American Linguistics 48: 460-467. Erskine, John Elphinstone 1853 Journal of a cruise among the islands of the Western Pacific, (... ). London: Murray. Ferguson, Charles A 1975 "Toward a characterization of English Foreigner Talk", Anthropological Linguistics 17: 1-14. Ferreira, Jose dos Santos 1978 Papid Cristam di Macau. Macao: Tipografia da Missao. Forbes, D. 1859 A dictionary of the Hindustani language. London: Wm. H. Allen. Goodman, Morris 1985 "Review article of Bickerton 1981 ", International Journal of American Linguistics 51: 109-137. Haddon, AC. 1907 "The jargon English of Torres Straits", in: Ray, S.H. Reports of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to the Torres Straits, vol. 3: 251-254. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hall, Robert A 1943 "Notes on Australian Pidgin English", Language 203-207. 1961 "How Pidgin English has evolved", New Scientist 9: 413-415.

581

Hancock, Ian F. 1971 "A map and list of pidgin and creole languages", in: Dell Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages 509624. London: Cambridge University Press. Hazael-Massieux, Guy 1991 "L' expression de la determination en creole de la Caraibe", in: Haudry, Jean (ed.), Questions creoles questions linguistiques. Actes de la table ronde de novembre 1989, 6383. Lyon: Centre d'Etudes Linguistiques Jacques Goudet. Holm, John 1992 "Atlantic meets Pacific: lexicon common to English-based pidgins and creoles", Language Sciences 14: 185-196. Holman, James 1834 A voyage round the world, including travels in Africa, Asia, Australasia, America, etc., etc. from 1827 to 1834. London: Smith, Elder & Co. Keate, George 1788 An account of the Pelew Islands (... ). London: G. Nicol. Keesing, Roger M. 1988 Melanesian Pidgin and the Oceanic substrate. Stanford:Stanford University Press. Knowlton, Edgar C. 1967 "Pidgin English and Portuguese", in: F.S. Drake (ed.), Symposium on historical, archaeological and linguistic studies on southern China, South-East Asia and the Hong Kong region. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Mathews, Samuel Augustus 1822 The Willshire squeeze. Demerara: Guiana Chronicle Office. McFarlane, S. 1873 The story of the Lifu mission. London: James Nisbet. Melville, Herman 1846 Narrative of a four months' residence among the natives of a valley of the Marquesas islands; or A peep at Polynesian life. London: John Murray. [titled "Typee" in later editions]

582

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Meyer, Bernard F.-Theodore F. Wempe 1947 The student's Cantonese-English Dictionary. New York: Field Afar Press. Mihalic, Francis 1971 The Jacaranda dictionary and grammar of Melanesia Pidgin. Brisbane: Jacaranda Press. Montalto de Jesus, C.A. (1902) 1984 Historic Macao. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Mosel, Ulrike 1980 Tolai and Tok Pisin: the influence of the substratum on the development of New Guinea Pidgin. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics B-73. Munro, Doug 1990 "The origins of labourers in the South Pacific: commentary and statistics", in: Clive Moore-Jacqueline Leckie-Doug Munro (eds.), Labour in the South Pacific, xxxix-Ii. Townsville: James Cook University of Northern Queensland. Miih1hausler, Peter 1978 "Samoan Plantation Pidgin English and the origin of New Guinea Pidgin", Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 1. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-54: 67-120. 1979 Growth and structure of the lexicon of New Guinea Pidgin. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-52). 1985 "The number of Pidgin Eng1ishes in the Pacific", Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 4. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics An: 25-51. 1986a Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 1986b "Bonnet blanc et blanc bonnet: adjective-noun order, substratum and language universals", in: Muysken-Smith (eds.), 4155. Muysken, Pieter-Norval Smith (eds.) 1986 Substrata versus universals in creole genesis. AmsterdamlPhiladelphia: John Benjamins. Newland, S. 1894-95 "Some Aboriginals I have known", Proceedings of the Royal Geographical

Society of Australasia (South Australian Branch) 2: 37-54. Reinecke, John E. 1937 Marginal languages: a sociological survey of the creole languages and trade jargons. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University. Richards, J. 1849 "A cruize through the Mozambique Channel, H.M.S. Geyser", The Nautical Magazine and Naval Chronicle 456-464. Roberts, Jane 1834 Two years at sea: (... ). London: Richard Bentley. Roberts, Julian 1993 The use of Pidgin Hawaiian through-out the Pacific in the nineteenth century. Paper presented at the Second International Conference of the World History Association, June 1993. forthcoming "Pidgin Hawaiian: a sociohistorical study", (to appear in the Journal of Pidgin and Creole Linguistics?). Romaine, Suzanne 1988 Pidgin and Creole Languages. London & New York: Longman. Ross, Alan S.c.-A.W. Moverley 1964 The Pitcairnese language. London: Andre Deutsch. Schuchardt, Hugo 1883 "Kreolische Studien V: 'Ueber das Melaneso-englische"', Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien (philosophisch-historische Klasse), 105: 151161. 1889 "Beitrage zur Kenntniss des englischen Kreolisch II. Melaneso-Englisches", Englische Studien 13: 158-162. Heilbronn. Seiler, WaIter 1982 "The spread of Malay to Kaiser Wilhelms land", in: R. Carle et al. (eds.), Gava?: Studies in Austronesian languages and cultures, 67-85. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. Shi, Dingxu 1986 Chinese Pidgin English. Its origin and linguistic features. M.A. long paper, Uni-

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

versity of Pittsburgh, Department of Linguistics. Siegel, Jeff 1986 "Pidgin English in Fiji: a socio-linguistic history", Pacific Studies 9(3): 53-106. Simon, L.-H. Young 1978 Pijin blong yumi. Honiara: Solomon Islands Christian Association. Troy, Jakelin

583

1985 Australian Aboriginal contact with the English language in New South Wales: 1788 to 1845. Unpubl. B.A. hons. thesis, University of Sydney. Wallis, M.D. 1851 Life in Feejee, or, five years among the cannibals. Boston: William Heath. Wurm, Stephen A. 1971 "Pidgins, creoles and lingue franc he" , Current Trends in Linguistics 8: 999-1021.

Relevant maps The spread of "fellow" as a grammatical affix. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 55. Provenance and diffusion of diagnostic features in Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 53. Development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 56. Provenance of diagnostic features of Pidgin English in the Pacific. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 54.

Development and diffusion of selected pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 57. Origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 47. Grammatical and lexical innovations in Pidgin English. Compiled by Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhausler. Map 58.

1800

1820

1840

I

1860

;.;.

1900

"CS "CS

Pitcairn

,

Norfolk

?Nautical Jargon

I'D

:I

~

~. ~

VI 00 ~

~

~ b:l

\:)

(

SS} i

\

{>- SWE --L.

.. I

China Coast PE

1880

J

J

\

E

Australian PE Roper River Creole Cape York Creole New Hebrides Pidgin Solomon Islands Pidgin spp - - - - New Guinea Pidgin NgaLilc Men's Language Hawaiian English China Coast Pidgin

SSJ = South Seas Jargon (polynesia and Micronesia) SWE = Sandalwood English (New Caledonia, Loyalty Islands, New Hebrides) EMP = Early Melanesian Pidgin (New Hebrides, Solomon Islands, Queensland, Fiji) = Samoan Plantation Pidgin SPP (from Clark 1979:48, by pennission) Figure 1 . Historical relations indicated by comparative and documentary evidence

~ ..., \:) ;:!

!:l...

~

~ ...,

~

;:::

~

;;: \:):

;::

c.,

~ ...,

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

585

Appendix 2 Table 1. First attestations of 106 selected MPE features throughout the Pacific No. Feature GO 1 n0 2 (preposed negator)

Earliest attestations in chronological order by territory I CPE1743, NZE1793. NSW1795, RYU1816, HAW1819, TAS1820, PIT1821,

TAH1821, F1Jl832,3 SAM1832, R0T1833, WES1833, CAR1835, VIC1835, SOUl837, MRQ1842, QLDl845, NOR1845, TON1846, LOY1850, NCA1852, C001852, WAF1856, KIR1857, VAN-1865-, PAP1871, SOL-1874-, DNG1875, TOR18824 CPE1743, NSW-1795-. NZE1811, RYUl816, TAS1817, HAW1820,5 PIT1821, G02 zero copula TAH1821, MRQ1825, WES1829, SAM1832, SOU1837, VIC1840, CAR1840, QLD-1843-, TOR1845,6 NOR 1845, NAUl846, LOY-1850-, C001852, KIR1855, VAN-1865-, WAF1866, SOL-1874-, DNG1875, PAP1877, FIJ1878 L01 piccaninny "small" CPE1747,7 (HAW1791),8 MRQ1826, SOUl836, WES1842, SOLI881, NOR-1888-, DNG1911, VAN1919, PAPl921 L02 tayo "friend" TAH1768, MR01791, NCA1850, VAN-1900 L03 mat(/e) "kill/die" TAH1769, NZE1772, TON1789, SOLI 858, NCA-1864-, VAN1871 CPE1769, TAS1824,9 NSW1826, SAM1832, VIC1838, TON1840,10 G03 too much NOUN SOUl841, TAH1842, NZE1849, QLD1856-, CAR1857, WESI864, VAN1870, HAW1873, SOL-1874, DNG1875, NOR1882, PAP1885, TOR1886,11 L04 maski "never mind" CPE1769, DNG 1908CPE1783, NZE1817, NSW1826, RYUl827, F1Jl832,12 WES1838, R0T1845, L05 got "have" QLD1848, CAR1858, MRQ1858, KIR-1861, VAN1871, LOY-1873, SOL-1874-, DNG 1879, NCA-1883, TORI888-, NOR-1888-, HAW1888, 13 SAM-1890-, SOUl890-, PAP-1907 L06 massa "mister" CPE1784, NSW-1797-, RYU1816, F1Jl827, TAH1830, SOUl841, VIC1842, TOR1845, QLDl847, VAN1872, WES-1874, PAP1887, DNG1914, SOLI920 G04 all same "as, like" CPE1784, HAW-1805-, RYU1816, NSW1824, TAS1824,14 TON1829

I All attestations are tabulated according to location. Where the speaker is not a native of that territory, this is indicated in a footnote. Hyphens indicate, e.g. -1845 "not later than 1845", 1845- "in 1845 or later", -1845- "in about 1845". Bracketed entries indicate isolated attestations, i.e. features which appear not to have become established in that territory. 2 Excluded from this table are attestations from an Erromangan girl in 1830 who was brought up by missionaries and subsequently taken to Britain, and one from a Wiku islander in 1834 who had travelled to the USA. 3 Speaker is Tongan. 4 Speaker is Pacific islander (unidentified but not from Torres Straits). 5 Excluded from consideration in this table is an utterance attributed to a Hawaiian in 1791 who had recently returned from a trip to Boston: By and by you dead; Tiana too many men (Roberts p.c. citing Ingraham 1791). 6 In this and all subsequent references to TOR1845, speaker is identified only as 'Antonio the black steward'. 7 Not attested after 1750. 8 Not attested in this sense after 1843 (Roberts, p.c.). 9 Speaker is an Aborigine from NSW. 10 Speaker is Rotuman. II Speaker is from Singapore. 12 Speaker is Tongan. 13 Speaker is Portuguese. 14 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW.

586

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Table 1. continued

G05 all

(plural)

L07 too much (pre verb )

L08 kanaka "Pacific islander" L09 no good "bad"

POI me "I"

G06 what for "why"

LIO catch "get" G07 suppose "if'

L11 savi "know"

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

WES1832, NZE1835, VIC1841, QLD1842, NOR1847, MRQ1850,15 CAR-1851-, NCA1852, KIR-1861, VAN1867, TAH1870, SAM-1875, DNG1875, FIJl878, SOLI880. R0T1880, PAP1881, TOR1882,16 C001883,17 SOU1890, NAU 1908 (CPE1784), TAS1824,18 (NSW1826), (TON1829), F1Jl845,19 LOY1851, KIR-1861, VAN-1865-, WAF1866,20 PAP1875, DNG1875-, R0T1880, SOLI 882, NCA1882, QLD1885, TOR1888, NOR1900 CPE1787, NSW1826, SAM1832, WES1836, TON1840, SOUl841-, TAH1842, NOR1848, QLDl849, VIC1850, LOY-1850-, MRQ1852, KIR-1861, WAF1861, VAN-1865-, PAP1877, FIJ-1886,21 SOLI 887, TORI888-, CAR1896, HAW1900 HAW1794, CAR1835, MRQ1842, C001853,22 KIR1857, NCA-1864-, LOY1864, QLDl865, DNG1884, VAN1888, TAH-1899-, SOLI929, PAPmod NSW-1795-, CPE1807, NZE1814-, RYUl816, PIT 1821, TAS1824,23 HAW1831, WES1833, TAH1835, SOU1837, VIC1842-, TOR1843, CAR1843, COO 1852, MRQ 1852, QLD 1855-, KIR-1861, V AN-1865-, W AF1866, R0T1880, SOLI880, PAP1881, DNGl883, NCA-1883, SAM1883, NOR-1888NSW-1795-, CPE1811, NZE1814-, TAS1817,24 HAW1819, MRQ1825, TAH1825, TON1829, WES1831, SAM1832, KIR-1834-, VIC1835, R0T1835, CAR1840, SOUl841, QLD-1842-, FIJ-1844,25 TOR1845, C001852, NCA1852, LOY1857, WAF1861, VAN1870, DNGl875, SOLI 882, PAP1885, NOR1888 CPE1796, NSW1821, PIT1821, RYUl827, WES1834, TAS1840, SOUl841, VIC1842, QLD1843, NOR1843, TOR1845, TAH-1848, CAR1853, KIR-1861, LOY1862, VANI867-, DNGl875, NCA-1880, PAP1885, SOLI888, SAM1890, HAW1891, C001900 CPE1799, NSW1826, TAS1828, R0T1833, QLD-1842-, SOL-1874-, DNG1880, LOY-1880, PAP1884, VAN1888, NOR-1888-, HAW1891, WES-1954 CPE1800, NSW181O, NZE1818, HAW1820, PIT1821, TAS1824,26 MRQ1842, FIJ1845,27 TON1846, QLD1849, C001852, CAR1853, VIC1855, KIR1857, LOY1864, VAN-1865-, NCA1867-, DNG1875, PAP1877, R0T1879-, SOLI880, SAM1883, TOR1888, NOR1889, WES1893, SOUl923 CPE1800, TAH1848, MRQ1858,28 HAW1859, KIR1861,29 VAN-1865-,

Speaker is Hawaiian. Speaker is Pacific islander (origin not stated but not Torres Straits islander). Speaker is Cook islander at sea (attested within Cook islands from 1908). Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. Speaker is from Rotuma. Speaker is from the Cook islands. Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. Speaker is Tahitian. Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. Speaker is Tongan. Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. Speaker is Tongan. Attested as sava. Attested as saba.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

587

Table 1. continued WAF1866, PAP1871, LOY-1880, NCA-1880, SOU880, R0T1880, QLD-1880-, TOR1882,30 SAM1883, DNG1883, FIJ-1890-, WES1893,31 NORI913, SOU-1950NSW1801, TAS1817,32 WESJ83J, VIC1835, NZE1840,33 SOU1841, LI2 blackfellow "indigene" QLD-1842-, NOR1847, VAN-1865-, SOL-1874-, NCA-1880, SAM1883, FIJ-1886,34 PAP1887 CPE1807, TAS1820,35 SAMJ832, FIJ1845,36 VIC1850, NCA1852, G08 go VERB CAR-1854,37 LOY1864, QLD-1882, KIR1884, MRQ1888,38 TOR1888, NOR1888, HAW1888,39 SOL-1897, PAP-1898, VANI916,40WESI954, DNGmod CPE1807, HAW1821,41 NZEJ824, TAS1824,42 NSW1826, WES1831,43 G09 by and by (clause VIC1838, SOU1841, MRQ1842, FIJ1845,44 LOY1851, C001852, TAH1852, initiaVfinal) QLD-1855-,VAN-1865-, SOL-1874-, CARI875-, R0T1879-, WAF1883,45 NCA-1883, DNG1883, PAP1885, NOR1888, TOR1888, KIR1889,46 SAM1890 L 13 piccaninny NZE1814-, NSW1816, TASJ8J7, TAH-1825, MRQ1833, NOR1835, "young child" SOUl837, VIC1840, QLD-1842-, TOR1843, COO-1861, NCA-1864, SAM1883, SOL-1884-, VAN1886, WES1886, NAUl908, DNGI908-, PAP1910 P02 resumptive he NZE1814-, HAW1824, CPEJ84J, FIJ1845,47 C001852, TAH1852, KIR-1861, VAN-1865-, NCA-1868, CAR1874, SAM-1875, DNG1875, QLD1876, PAPI877, R0T1879-, TOR1882,48 SOL-1883, MRQ1888,49 SOUI890-, NOR1908 LI4gammon NZE1814, NSW1825, VICI842-, QLDl847, SOU1851, VAN1867, PAP1873, "lie" (n. and v.) DNG1875, SOLI884, FIJ-1886,50 TOR1888LI5 ta(m)bu NZE1814-, MRQ1825, NCAJ845, VAN1871, SOL-1874-, KIR-1861,

30 Speaker is Pacific islander (unidentified, but not from Torres Straits). 31 Speaker is Chinese; first attested from Aborigine speaker in 1922. 32 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. 33 The example comes from the Chatham islands. 34 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. 35 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. 36 Speaker is from Rotuma. 37 all go and kill every man board ship. Though rather unsatisfactory, this is treated as a bona fide example of go as an auxiliary by Keesing (1988:32). 38 Speaker is Hawaiian. 39 Speaker is Chinese. 40 Speaker is Seychellois. 41 See note 5 above. 42 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. 43 Speaker is identified as a Lascar (Muslim sailor from the Indian subcontinent). 44 Speaker is Rotuman. 45 Speaker is Cook islander. 46 An earlier attestation comes from a Kiribatian sailor in Hong Kong in 1861. 47 Speaker is Tongan. 48 Speaker is from Singapore. 49 Speaker is Hawaiian. 50 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu.

588

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Table 1. continued WAF1866,51 DNG1938, PAPmod NZE1814-, MR01826. ROT1833, NCA1843, S0L1858, VAN1869, DNG1875, FIJ1878, QLD1882, SAM1883, TOR-1888-, PAP1896, KIR-1899 TAS1817,52 NSW1826, SOU1844, WES1864, QLD-1870-, S0L1884-, L 17 little bit "slightly, a bit" TOR1888-, FI1-1890-, PAP191O-, VAN-1914, DNG1915,53 NOR-1943 L18 beche de mer (HAW1836), TOR1884, (QLD1885), SOLmod, PAPmod, DNGmod "trepang" L19 whitefellow TAS1820, NSW1823, WES1829, VIC1836, SOU1841, QLD1843, NOR1847, "European (n)" SAM1883, S0L1886, KIR1897,54DNG-1901, PAP1907, VAN1929 G 10 plenty "very" TAS1820, NSW1826, WES1831, S0U1841, VIC1841, NOR1843, WAF1856, NZE-1860-, QLD1865, VAN1883, SOL-1883, NCA-1883, KIR-1899, HAW1904,55 PAP1923 TAS1820,56 NSW1826, QLD1842, VIC1842, FI1-1842-,57 NOR1843, GIl -m (transitive suffix)58 S0U1845, TON1846, WES1864, VAN1867, SOL-1874-, DNG1875, ROT-1880-, SAM1880, NCA-1883, PAP1884, TORI888-, KIR1889,59 NAU1908 TAS1820,60 NSW1835, SOU1837, FI1-1842-, CPE1848, (LOY-1850-),61 G 12 come VERB NCA1852, NZE-1860-, WESI864, VAN1867, CAR1878, R0T1880, HAW1895, QLD-1909,62 S0L1937,63 NSW1824, TAS1824,64 RYU1827, WES1830, CPE1833, R0T1833, G 13 plenty NOUN HAW1836, VIC1838, S0U1841, TAH1842, MRQ1842, QLD-1843-, NOR1845, CAR1851, NCA1852, KIR1857, COO-1861, LOY1864, V AN-1865-, F1Jl869,65 PAP1871, SOL-1874-, DNG1875, TOR1882,66 TAS1824,67 NSW1825, VIC1842, QLD1845, TOR1884, NOR-1888-, L20 all about "everywhere" S0L191l-,WESI928, VANmod G14 (a)long( a) (multi- NSW1826, TAS1828, CPE1831, VIC1841, NCA1842, QLD-1843-, CAR1857

"taboo; sacred" L16 kaikai "eat/food"

51 Speaker is Cook islander. 52 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. Attested by a Tasmanian Aborigine in 1820. 53 Muhlhausler p.c. - to be confirmed (M 1978?) 54 Speaker is Jamaican. 55 Speaker is Chinese. 56 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. 57 Only one example from a Fijian speaker: man belongen ebery place see me; me like um man belong noder place. An example from an immigrant fromVanuatu is attested in 1882. 58 Counted as such only where overt NP follows. Thus the following example from a Hawaiian in California in 1835 is excluded: You - suppose one got money - lock him up in chest. CPE is excluded because it is found only with verbs having a stem ending -I and is not a transitive suffix as such. 59 This is the first unambiguous example. There are several earlier but very dubious examples. 60 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW. 61 Dubious example: big ship come and kill him. 62 Speaker is Portuguese. 63 European speaker. 64 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW; attested from a Tasmanian Aborigine in 1824. 65 Speaker is from Rotuma. 66 Speaker is not from Torres Straits but an unidentified Pacific islander. 67 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

589

Table 1. continued purpose preposition) SOL-1874-,VANI877, SAM1880, DNG1883, PAP1885, NOR1888, TORI888-, KIR1889, S0U1890, WES1892, TAH1893 NSW1824, TAS1828, SOUJ84J, QLD-1842-, NOR1845,68 SOL-1874-, L21 devil devil "evil spirit" DNGI884, TOR1898, VAN191O, PAP-1923L22 stop "be (at)" NZE1824, OLDI842-, CAR-1850, NCA1852, KIR-1861, VAN-1865-, FIJ1869,69 SOL-1874-, DNGI875, CPE1878, LOY-1880, R0T1880, SAM1883, TORI886,70HAWI891, NORI913, PAPl921, WES1986 NSW1825, OLD-1843-, VICJ844, NOR1847, S0U1851, DNG1904, PAPI921 L23 sit down "reside!be (at)" GI5 been (TMA marker) NSW1826, TAS1828, QLDJ842, KIR1861, CAR-1877-, VAN1877, S0L1888, NOR1888, TOR1888-, S0U1890, PAP1899, DNG1899, HAW-1899-,71 WES1900 GI6plenty (preverbal) NSW1826, WES 1831, SAMJ832, VIC1835, S0U1844, CAR1853, QLD1858, VAN1867, DNG1875, R0T1879, S0L1884, NOR1888, KIR-1899, HAW-1933 NSW1826, WES1831, CARJ853,72 WAF1856, QLD1858, KIR-1861, G 17 plenty (postposed adverb) SOL-1883, VAN1889, S0U1890, DNGI893, PAP-1923, HAW-1972 L24 more better "better" NSW1826, CPE1831, NZEJ843, CAR 1852, MRQ1858, QLD1866, PAP1881, VAN1883, NOR-1888-, TOR1888-, KIR1889, SAM-1890-, HAW1896, WES1911, S0L1912, DNG1914 L25 tomahawk "axe" NSW1826, WES1833, VICJ842-, NCA1845, QLD1866, VAN1871, S0L1886, DNG-1887, PAP-1907 L26 bullock "cattlelbeef' NSW1826, S0U1841, QLD J844-, VAN-1900, SOL-191 GI8 belong (genitive) NSW1826, VIC1842, OLD1842-, (FIJ-1842-),73 NOR1847, (CAR-1854-),74 NCAI864, LOY1864, VAN1865, DNG1875, S0L1880, TOR1882,75 SAM1883, (KIR1884), PAP1885, WES1888, NAU1908 L27 look out NSW-1826, VIC1842, SOU-I860-, WES1864, QLD-1858-, VAN1884,PAPI885, "search for; hunt" TORI888-, NOR1894, DNG1901, S0L1908, L28 close up "near (by)" NSW1826, OLD1844, VANJ886, S0L1888, TOR-1888-, NOR-1888-, S0U1890-, WES1911, PAP-1923, DNG-1923-, L29 sugar bag NSW1826, OLD1846-, WES-J874, TOR-1888-, VANmod "honeycomb" GI9 make -m (NP) VP NSW1826, KIR-1861, VANI867, QLD-1882, NCA-1883, SAM1883, SOU1890, FIJ-1890-,76 S0L1908, DNGI908-, PAP1920 L30walkabout "wander" NSW1828, TAS1828, NZEJ840,77 QLDI863-, VAN1867, NOR1877, S0L1895, WES-1890, SOU1890-, TOR1898, DNG1914, PAP1926 68 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW; first attestation from Northern Territory resident in 1894. 69 Speaker is from Kiribati. 70 Speaker is from Singapore. 71 Based on the indication in Roberts 1993 (handout) that one example is known from the period 1897-1901. 72 Ambiguous examp1e:every girl like plenty hear Mr Snow ... Unambiguous examples from 1857. 73 The example is given above in note 58. No other examples are found until 1882 and later, all attributable to immigrants, not Fijians. 74 Then kanakas take chests, small things ashore; then set fire to ship; burn sails, rigging, spars, casks, every thing belonging to ship. A more satisfactory example is not found until 1897.

75 Speaker is unidentified Pacific islander. Examples from Torres Straits islanders are found from 1888. 76 Speaker is Indian immigrant. 77 Walk about one shilling.

590

Philip Baker and Peter MilhlMusler

Table 1. continued L31 number one "best/chief' L32 bulmakau "cattle; beef' L33 boy "non-European adult male" L34 moon "month"

CPE1828, CAR1877, HAW-1890-, SAM-1895, DNG-1925-, NOR-1939 TON1829, FIJ-1840-, SAM-1843-, VAN-1871-, NCA-1883, DNGl886, KIR-1899, PAP1907-, SOL-1908-, NOR-1939 CPE1831, NZE1840, QLD1858, WES1864, VAN1870, SOL-1884-, PAP1885, DNG-1887, NOR1928 WES1831, SQUl841, QLD1845, VAN1871, DNG1883, PAP1884, (FIJ-I889),78 NOR1913 WES1833, SOU1839, QLD1868, VAN1871, NCA-1883, DNGl890, PAP1905, NOR1906, SOLl912 NZE183S, NCA1845, TAH1851, MRQ1852, LOY1864, VAN1875, SOL-1884-

G20 what name "who"f'what" (pronoun) L35 wiwi "French (person)" L36 new chum NSW183S, QLD-1857, SOL-1884-, PAP-1926, VANmod, DNGmod "newcomer" L37 salt water NSW1839, NOR1845,79 QLD1847, VAN-1869, DNG1875, NCA1880, "sea; coastal" FIJI885,80 SOLl897, PAP-1907 L38first time NSW1839-, OLD1863-, WES1865, VAN1877, NOR-1888-, TOR1888, "ahead; fonnerly" SOUl890-, DNGl908-, PAP1910, SOLl912 L39 grass "hair; plumage" NSW1839-, QLD1865-, SAM1883,81 TOR-1888, DNG1898-, PAP-1912, VAN1916 SOU1841, QLD-1850-, NSW-1880-, VAN1880, NOR1882, FIJ-1886,82 L40 my word! TOR-1886,83 PAP1887, SOL-1888, KIR-1890-, WES1914, DNG-1916 QLD-1842-, NSW1850, S0L1884-, PAP1885, HAW1887, TOR1888-, P03 you and me NCA-1894,84 DNGl898, VAN-1900, L41 too much (adverb) WES1842, MRQ1852, CAR-1858, KIR-1861, QLDl863, VAN1870, PAP1875, DNGl875-, ROTl880, SOL-1884-, TOR1888-, NOR-1939 G21 adjfellow NOUN QLD-1842-, VIC1855, NSW1863, WES1864, VAN1871, SOL-1874-, PAP1874, (prop) LOY-1880, NCA-1880, ROTl880, FIJI882,85 SAM1883, NOR1883, DNG1884, SOUl 890 L42 mary "woman" QLD1842-, SOL-1874-, VAN1877, DNG1898, (FIJ-1900)86 PAP-1926, G22 thatfellow NOUN QLD-1842-, DNG1876, VAN1877, NSW1880, NCA-1883, SAM1883, SOLl886, NOR1888, PAP1907-, WES1954 G23 VERB ADJ fellow WES1842, QLDl885, NOR1888, VAN-1914, DNG-1915-, SOLl920, PAPI921, (adverbial) SOUl 923 L43 cranky "crazy" NSW1843, QLD1855-, TOR1886,87 VAN-1900, DNGl924-, WESl928, NOR-1943, SOLmod, PAPmod 78 Speaker is from Tanna. 79 Speaker is Aborigine from NSW; no other attestation until -1939. 80 Speaker is from Malaita. 81 Speakers are Melanesian immigrants. 82 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. 83 Speaker is Malay. 84 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. 85 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. 86 Speaker is European. 87 Speaker is from Singapore.

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

591

Table 1. continued (NSW1844), (OLDl858-), CPEJ878, (NCA-1880-), NOR1888, DNG1914, VANmod, SOLmod, PAPmod (TAH-1846),88 C001852, NCAJ863,89 VAN1886, MRQ1888, TORI888-, CAR1900, PAP-1919, DNG-1923-, NOR-1946, SOLmod G25 number fellow NOUN VIC1847, OLD1848, DNGJ876, VAN1877, NSW-1880-, SOU880, FIJ1882,90 (prop) TOR1888, NOR1888, PAP1896, WES1928 G26((a)n)otherfellow VIC1847, NSW-1862-, QLD-J87J, VAN1883, SOU886, NOR1888, DNGI908, NOUN PAP-1938, WES1954 91 L45 look out CAR1853, KIR-1861, NCA-J864-, DNG1875, R0T1880, QLD-1881, VAN1884, "take care of' PAP1885, TORI888-, SOU908, NOR-1939 P04 altogether "they" QLD-1858-, V AN1884, DNGl884, SOU886, PAPmod G27 this fellow NOUN QLD·1855·, VAN187l, DNGJ875, NCA-1883, SAM1883, SOU888, PAPl92I, NOR1946, WES1954 G28 altogether NOUN QLD·1858·, VAN1877, SOL-J880, PAP1885, DNG1914 "all"/(plural) KIR1861, VAN-1872, SAMJ883, SOU884, TOR1888-, NCA-1894, DNG-1901, L46 pigeon "bird (of any kind)" QLD-1906, PAP-1912, NCA1864, VAN1867, LOYJ868, DNG1875, SOL-1884-, PAP-1926 L47 man bush (man Api. etc) L48littlefellow QLD1864, DNG1895, PAPJ899-, VAN1905 P05 you fellow "you (pI)" QLD1866, TORI888-, PAPJ898, SOL-1909, DNG-19l1, VAN-19l4, WES1925, NOR-1946 L49 calico "c1oth(es)" VAN1867, FIJI878, QLDJ885, PAP1907-, SOL-1910G29 what name "why" QLD1868, SOU888, VANJ894, TOR1898, DNGl908, PAP191O, SOUl923, NOR1939 92 L50 steal "recruit ROT1869, VAN1871, QLDJ879, F1Jl882,93 SOU885, DNG-1910(by force)" L51 beach la mar NCA·1870, VAN-1878 "Bislama" L52 sing out "calVshout" NSW·1867·, OLD-1870-, S0L1888. TORJ888-. NOR-J888-, SAM1890, VAN1905, DNG1908-, PAP191O-, WES1913, PIT-1964 L53 small fellow "small" VAN·1871·, SOU880, R0T1880, SAM1883, TORI888-, DNG1898, PAPI921 L54 yam "year" VAN·1871., DNG-1887, S0L1888 L55 singsing "dance" VAN1871, DNG1908, SOL-J926, PAPmod L56 buy "recruit VAN1872, SOL-1884-, DNGJ930(with presents)" SOL1874·, VAN1884, QLDJ886, TOR189l, DNGI908-, PAP-I920, NOR-1939 P06 me fellow "we" P07 he fellow "they" SOL·1874·, V AN-1886 VAN1877, TORI888-, S0L1890, DNG1899-, (QLDl906), PAPmod G30 what name "which"f'what" (relative) G24 by and by (preverbal marker) L44 calabouse "prison"

88 Attested as a loanword, tarapiita, in Melville 1846 (Anthony Grant, p.c.). 89 Most subsequent New Caledonian attestations have r rather than I, i.e. carabousse. 90 Speaker is ni-Vanuatu. 91 Speaker is European. 92 Speaker is European. 93 Speaker is from the Cook islands.

592

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Table 1. continued L57 kill "hit; strike" L58 something "thing" L59 capsize "pour/upset" L60 belly "seat of the emotions" G31finish (postverbal completive marker) L61flash "smart" P08 him he "he" L62 bugger up "spoil" L63 liklik "little" L64 might "perhaps" P09 all he "they" L65 tasol "that's all, etc." G32 where "who/which/that"

VAN1877, NOR1889, WES1895, QLD-1907, SOL-1926, PAPmod, DNGmod QLD-1880-, VAN-1895, DNG1898-, SOL-1926, PAP-1926, NCA-1883, OLD1884, VAN1900, S0L1926, PAPmod, DNGmod SOL1884, (KIR1887), VAN-1900, PAP1919, DNGmod SOL-1884-, DNG1893, VAN1904, QLD1907, PAP1923, WES1942, NORl946 S0L1887, TOR1888, QLD1899, VAN1910, PAP1920, NOR1923, -DNG1930 TOR1888, S0L1897, VAN-1900, PAP1910-, DNG1924TOR1888-, SOL-1926, DNG-1930, VANmod, PAPmod DNG1898, (S0L1926), PAPmod QLD-1906, NOR-1906-, VAN-1914, S0L1937 DNG1908-, PAP191O-, VAN-1914, HAW-1933,94 SOL-1942, SAM1975 PAP1910-, SOL-1911, DNG-1911 VAN1913, SOLmod

94 Smith 1933; to be confirmed in later sources

The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific

593

Appendix 3 Table 2. Summary of the numbers of features associated with each of nine formative factors of MPE

factor 1 factor 2 factor 3 factor 4 factor 5 factor 6 factor 7

factor 8 factor 9

Features attributable to 'foreigner talk' English (G01-02; POI) 3 Features brought to the Pacific by sailors from pre-existing Atlantic or Asian 16 pidgins or creoles (G03-04, 06-07, 13, 15; L05-07, 09-11, 13,24,33,41) Features acquired from local languages by sailors on exploratory voyages and diffused more 5 widely by the latter (L02-03, 08, 15-16) Australian features which reached MPE either directly (from NSW or, more probably, from QLD) or indirectly and less probably from other Pacific islands (G to-II, 14, 15 16-19; Lt2, 19-20,29-30,39,43,62) Australian features which appear to have reached Melanesia directly (G20-22 28 25-29; Lt4, 17,21,23,25-28, 34, 36-38,40,42,48,52,58,64; P03-04) Pidgin features apparently transmitted to Melanesia from Micronesia and Polynesia 8 (G05; Lt8, 32, 35, 45-46,50; P02) Features taken by Melanesian recruits to Queensland 6 (L08, 11, 16,45,50;P02) 1 LESS - included under factor 2 (Ltl) 2 - included under factor 3 (L08, 16) -6 0 - included under factor 6 (L45, 50, P02) ~ Innovations associated with the period when Melanesians worked in Queensland (G23, P05) 2 Features first attested in MPE (all postdating the return of the first recruits from 12 Queensland) (G30-32; LOl, 47, 49,51,53-57,59-60,63,65; P06-07, 09) 96 to Others (see text) (G08-09, 12,24; L04, 22, 31,44,61; P08) Total

to6

Appendix 4 Table 6. Summary of the number of grammatical, lexical and pronominal features associated with each of the formative factors

factor &rarnmatical features lexical features 12ronominal features 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 others Total 7

no.

~

2 6

6% 19%

7 8 1 1 3

22% 25% 3% 3% 9% 13% 100%

4

32

--

DQ...

.%

to 5 8 18 6

15% 8% 12% 28% 9%

13

20% 8% 100% 8%

J

65 5

llQ.,.

.%

1

11%

2 1 1 3

22% 11% 11% 33% 11% 99% 11%

1

9 1

total llQ.,.

3 16 5 15 28 8 2 19 to to6 6

~

3% 15% 5% 14% 26% 8% 2% 18% 9% 100% 6%

594

Philip Baker and Peter Miihlhiiusler

Appendix 4 continued Table 7. Summary of the number 95 of grammatical, lexical and pronominal features attested first in each territory territQQ!

~ammilli!;;lll !lQ."

NSW CPE QLD

VAN

NZE TAS SOL WES

TAH NCA HAW VIC TOR DNG TON SOU CAR KIR ROT PAP NOR Total Australia96

7.5 9 5 2

felll!r! u). Summary of issues Like any other language, Indonesian is a product of its linguistic, cultural, geographic, and political history. In the case of Indonesian these factors have resulted together in a relatively successful example of language planning and language standardisation at the national level. But at the same time, the role of the national language in relation to regional and local languages is an issue which continues to be felt at all levels of society. The question people face is, should Indonesian be a force for unity at the expense of the diversity of existing languages and cultures, or should national unity be built on a foundation that accommodates and appreciates ethnolinguistic diversity? Indonesian is a well-described Austronesian language. The reader is referred to other sources for study of the sound system, morphology, vocabulary, and grammar. Among these other sources are: Adelaar 1992; Balai Pustaka 1988a, b; Chung 1976; Dardjowidjojo 1971; EcholsShadily 1975, 1989; Kana 1986; Kaswanti Purwo 1984, 1986; MacDonald 1976; Moeliono 1986; Moeliono-Grimes 1995; Omar 1977; Poerwadarminta 1982; Prentice 1978, 1987; Wilkinson 1959. There is a recent mushrooming of available textbooks, but among the more widely used texts are Dardjowidjojo 1984; Johns 1977; and Wolff, Oetomo and Fietkewicz 1985.

Notes 1.

I follow the suggestion made by the editors of Indonesia Circle (1980 Vol. 23) that the official term 'Bahasa Indonesia' is appropriate when writing or speaking in Indonesian, 'Indonesian' is the preferred term when speaking or writing in English,

2.

and 'Bahasa' by itself is to be avoided altogether. See Adelaar and Prentice (this Atlas); also Grijns (1991); B.D. Grimes (1991); Prentice (1978 and 1994), Steinhauer (1991); Voorhoeve (1983).

Indonesian - the official language of a multilingual nation

3.

4.

5.

Versions of this are popularly known in Indonesian churches today as the Terjemahan Lama. The most widely used Indonesian translation, the Terjemahan Baru, is for the most part a revision of the Terjemahan Lama, rather than a new translation. Brugmans (1938: 24) notes that the goal of establishing Dutch as the unifying language of the archipelago never fully died out. The coining of the term 'Indonesia' is attributed by some (see Abas 1987: 10) to an Englishman named J. R. Logan in 1850, as a Greek compound from Indos 'India' and nesos 'land, island'. The term is found in a growing number of scientific and government report titles through the latter half of the

6.

7. 8.

725

1800s and into this century prior to independence. The original text: "Pertama: Kami putra dan putri Indonesia mengaku bertumpah darah jang satu, tanah tumpah darah Indonesia; Kedua: Kami putra dan putri Indonesia mengaku berbangsa jang satu, bangsa Indonesia; Ketiga: Kami putra dan putri Indonesia mendjundjung tinggi bahasa persatuan, bahasa Indonesia." (adapted from Abas 1987:10). 1945 Constitution, Article 36. Not to mention additional complications such as the speech levels of languages like Javanese and their social implications (see Wolff and Poedjosoedarmo 1982).

References Abas, Husen 1987 Indonesian as a unifying language of wider communication: a historical and sociolinguistic perspective. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics D-73. Adelaar, K. Alexander 1992 Proto-Malayic: the reconstruction of its phonology and parts of its lexicon and morphology. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C119. this Atlas "Malaysian the official language of Malaysia" . Adelaar, K.Alexander-D.J. Prentice this Atlas "Malay: its history, role and spread". Alisjahbana, Sutan Takdir 1956 Sedjarah bahasa Indonesia. Djakarta: Pustaka Rakjat. 1971 "Some planning processes in the development of the Indonesian-Malay language", in: Joan Rubin-Bjorn H. Jernudd (eds.), Can language be planned? Sociolinguistic theory and practice for developing nations, 179-187. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

1974 "Language policy, language engineering and literacy in Indonesia and Malaysia", in: Joshua Fishman (ed.), Advances in language planning, 391-416. The Hague: Mouton. 1984 "The concept of language standardisation and its application to the Indonesian language", in: Florian Coulmas (ed.), Linguistic minorities: language policy in developing countries, 77ff.. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Anderson, Benedict 1991 Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Revised edition. London: Verso. Bachtiar, Harsja W. 1975 "The development of a common national consciousness among students from the Indonesian Archipelago in the Netherlands", Majalah Ilmu-ilmu Sastra Indonesia 6(2): 3144. Balai Pustaka 1988a Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

726 Charles E. Grimes

1988b Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Brugmans, I.J. 1938 Geschiedenis van het onderwijs in Nederlandsch-Indie. Batavia/Groningen: Wolters. Cartier, A. 1985 "Discourse analysis of ergative and nonergative sentences in formal Indonesian", in: Frans Plank (ed.), Relational typology, 3145. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter. Chung, Sandra 1976 "An object-creating rule in Bahasa Indonesia", Linguistic Inquiry 7: 41-87. Cooley, Frank L. 1961 Altar and throne in Central Moluccan societies: a study of the relationship between the institutions of religion and the institutions of local government in a traditional society undergoing rapid social change. Ph.D. dissertation. Yale University, New Haven. Dardjowidjojo, Soenjono 1971 "The meN-, meN- -kan, and meN- -i verbs in Indonesian", Philippine Journal of Linguistics 2:71-84. 1984 Sentence patterns in Indonesian. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Echols, John M.-Hassan Shadily 1975 An English-Indonesian Dictionary. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1989 An Indonesian-English Dictionary. Third edition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Effendi, S. 1972 Ikhtisar sejarah bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Lembaga Bahasa Nasional. Fraassen, Ch. F. van 1983 "Historical introduction", in: Katrien Polman, The Central Moluccas: an annotated bibliography. KITL V Bibliographical Series 12: 1-59. Cinnaminson, NJ: Foris. Grijns, C.D. 1991 "Bahasa Indonesia avant la lettre in the 1920s". Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-81: 49-81.

Grimes, Barbara Dix 1991 "The development and use of Ambonese Malay", Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-81 : 83-123. Grimes, Barbara F. (ed.) 1992 Ethnologue: languages of the world. 12th edition. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Halim, Amran 1976 "Fungsi dan kedudukan bahasa Indonesia" Bahasa dan Sastra 1(5): 2-9. 1981 Intonation in relation to syntax in Indonesian. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics D36. Heryanto, Ariel 1990 "The making of Language: developmentalism in Indonesia", Prisma 50: 40-53. Hoffman, J .E. 1973 "The Malay language as a force for unity in the Indonesian archipelago, 1815-1900", Nusantara 4: 19-35. Hopper, Paul J. 1977 "Some observations on the typology of focus and aspect in narrative language", in: S. Poedjosoedarrno (ed.), NUSA: Miscellaneous studies in Indonesian and languages of Indonesia 3: 14-25. Johns, Yohanni, with Robyn Stokes 1977 Bahasa Indonesia: Langkah baru: a new approach. Book One. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Kana, Marit 1986 Grammatical Relations in Bahasa Indonesia. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca. Kaswanti Purwo, Bambang 1984 Deiksis dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka. 1986 "The presence and absence of meN- in Indonesian transitive verbs", Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-93: 159-170. Khaidir Anwar 1980 Indonesian: the development and use of a national language. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Indonesian - the official language of a multilingual nation

Kroeskamp, H. 1974 Early schoolmasters in a developing country: a history of experiments in school education in 19th century Indonesia. Assen: Van Gorcum. MacDonald, Ross 1976 Indonesian Reference Grammar. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Moeliono, Anton 1986 Language development and cultivation: alternative approaches in language planning. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics 0-68. Moeliono, Anton-Charles E. Grimes 1995 "Indonesian (Malay)", in: Tryon (ed.), 1: 443-457. Nababan, P.WJ. 1985 "Bilingualism in Indonesia: ethnic language maintenance and the spread of the national language", Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science 13(1): 1-18. Omar, Asmah Haji 1977 The phonological diversity o/the Malay dialects. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Ophuijsen, Charles A. van 1901 Kitab logat Melajoe: Wordenlijst voor de spelling der Maleische taal. Batavia. 1910 Maleische spraakkunst. Leiden: Van Doesburgh. Poerwadarminta 1982 Kamus Umum Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka. Prentice, J.D. 1978 "The best chosen language", Hemisphere 22(3): 18-23; 22(4): 28-33. 1987 "Malay (Indonesian and Malaysian)", in: Bernard Comrie (ed.), The world's major languages. 913-935. Sydney: Croon Helm. 1994 "Manado Malay: product and agent of language change", in: Tom Dutton-Darrell Tryon (eds.), Language contact and change in the Austronesian world. Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 77: 411441. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Rafferty, Ellen 1982 "Aspect in conversational Indonesian", in: Paul J. Hopper (ed.), Tense-aspect:

727

between semantics and pragmatics. 65-87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ricklefs, M.C. 1993 A history of modern Indonesia since c.1300. 2nd ed. London: The MacMillan Press. Ross, Malcolm D. 1995 "Some current issues in Austronesian linguistics", in: Tryon (ed.), 1:45-120. Steinhauer, Hein 1991 "On Malay in eastern Indonesia in the 19th century", Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-81: 197-225. Teeuw, A. 1959 "The history of the Malay language: a preliminary survey", Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 115(2): 138-156. 1967 Modern Indonesian literature. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Tryon, Darrell (ed.) 1995 Comparative Austronesian Dictionary: An introduction to Austronesian studies. 4 parts. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wilkinson, RJ. 1959 A Malay-English Dictionary, (romanised). 2 volumes. London: MacMillan. Wolff, John U.-Dede Oetomo-Daniel Fietkiewicz 1985 Beginning Indonesian through self instruction. Ithaca: Cornell University Southeast Asia Program. Wolff, John-Soepomo Poedjosoedarmo 1982 Communicative codes in Central Java. Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University. Wurm, Stephen A.-Shiro Hattori (eds.) 1981 Language atlas of the Pacific area, part 1: New Guinea area, Oceania, Australia. Canberra, Australian Academy of the Humanities. Also Pacific Linguistics C-66. 1983 Language atlas of the Pacific area, part 2: Japan area, Philippines and Formosa, mainland and insular South-east Asia. Canberra, Australian Academy of the Humanities. Also Pacific Linguistics C-67.

Malay-the national language of Malaysia K. Alexander Adelaar This section gives an overview of the development of Malay into the national language of Malaysia since the introduction of British rule. For the history of Malay in Southeast Asia prior to that period, see Adelaar and Prentice and furthermore Grimes (this Atlas). For the way standard Malay interacts with other languages in Malaysia, see under the heading Malaysia in Adelaar and Prentice (this Atlas). For standard Malay in Singapore and Brunei, see also under the headings Singapore and Brunei in Adelaar and Prentice (this Atlas). Malaysia is a multiracial society consisting of Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Ibans and a large number of smaller ethnic groups. Malay is the native language of the Malays, the largest ethnic group making up about half of the population. A standardized form of Malay has become the national language. Like Indonesian, this standardized Malay is based on the literary language of the courts of Riau and Johore. Malay became the national language in 1957 with the proclamation of independence. The language had received relatively little government attention during the period of colonization. Between 1786 and 1919 the Malay Peninsula gradually became a British colony known as 'Malaya' (Andaya and Andaya 1982:205).1 The British encouraged large numbers of Chinese and Indians to come to the Peninsula to work in tin mines and on rubber estates. As a result of this policy the Malays became a minority in their own country and were already outnumbered by the Chinese alone. Of a total popUlation of five and a half million in the Malay Peninsula in 1941, there were 44 per cent Chinese, 40.5 per cent Malays, 14 per cent Indians, 0.5 per cent Europeans and Eurasians, and 1 per cent others. Under British rule, the Malays continued to practice their traditional lifestyle in a hierarchically

highly structured society. Malay education was mainly of a religious character. It concentrated on reading Koran texts (in Arabic), and did not include the study of their own language. Secular education for Malays started in the Straits Settlements at the instigation of the British colonial administrator and founder of Singapore, Sir Stamford Raffles. The first school for Malays was founded in 1821 in Penang, and during the following decades a restricted number of other primary schools were founded by the government and missions in Singapore and Malacca. Real government interest in Malay education only began after 1867, and education lagged behind in both the Federated Malay States and the Unfederated Malay States. In the Unfederated Malay States, some of which came under British protectorate at a rather late stage of the colonization process, the first Malay school was founded in 1897 in Kedah, in Kelantan in 1903, and in Trengganu 2 in 1915. A major turning point in Malay education was the appointment of an Inspector of Schools (for the co-ordination of school systems) and an Assistant Director in charge of Malay Vernacular Education in the Straits Settlements and the Federated Malay States. R.O. Winstedt, a famous scholar of Malay language and customs, was appointed to the position of Assistant Director of Malay Vernacular Education in 1916. The first Primary Teacher Training College was founded in 1876 in Singapore. (The first Teacher Training College for women was established in 1935 in Malacca.) Conscious thinking about the curriculum of Malay schools began with the establishment of a Malay training college in Malacca. The Acting Head was RJ. Wilkinson, another well-known scholar of Malay language and culture. He improved the curriculum, changing the textbooks and collecting and publishing a large number of Malay classics which

730

K. Alexander Adelaar

became textbooks in the colleges and in the village schools. In 1922 the Sultan Idris Teachers College was opened. This was a more centralized teacher training college administered by Winstedt, who prepared a unified curriculum for teacher training in the Straits Settlements, the Federated Malay States and the Unfederated Malay States. In 1923 a Translation Bureau (attached to the Education Department of the colonial government in Kuala Lumpur) was established, with Zainal Abidin bin Ahmad as first translator. He later became a prominent Malay linguist and is usually referred to by the abbreviation Za'ba. In 1924 the Translation Bureau became a branch of the Sultan Idris Training College. Its functions were (l) the development of educational publications; (2) the publication of modem novels; (3) providing translations for other government departments; and (4) the training of Probationer Translator. Za'ba tried to improve the Translation Bureau by moving in the direction being taken by the Balai Pustaka (see Grimes) but he did not succeed. The Sultan Idris Teachers College forms a landmark in the development of Malay. It influenced the teaching of Malay in Malaysia as well as in Singapore and Brunei, Sarawak and Sabah. The establishment of Secondary Schools in Malay, however, did not take place until after the Second World War. Malay did play an important role in pre-war Malaysia and Singapore. It was a lingua franca, some form of which was understood by about 80 per cent of the population, and it had the status of a second official language after English. All civil servants were supposed to know Malay. But the true emergence of the Malay language was due to the rise of the nationalist movement in the 50s, when independence became a major aspiration. Before the Second World War, a new intellectual elite arose among the Malays. Its members consisted of British-educated members of the aristocracy, graduates from Muslim educational centres, and graduates from the Sultan Idris Teacher Training College in Tanjung Malim.

This elite was well aware of the economical and educational disadvantages of the Malays compared to other ethnic groups in the country. In 1946 it founded the UMNO (United Malays National Organisation), a political party which favoured the creation of a federation of independent Malay states. It later entered into a coalition with the Chinese and Indian ethnic parties. This coalition won the 1955 elections and obtained independence in 1957. The full meaning of national independence was realized in several stages in the following years. The coalition formed a Pemerintah Aliansi (Allied Government), which had education and the national language as high priorities in its program. Malay was accepted as the future national and official language by all three parties. Prior to independence an educational committee was created in 1956, led by the future Minister of Education Abdul Razak bin Datuk Hussein. In the so-called "Razak Report" the Committee recommended that Malay should become the national language of the country. It would be medium of instruction in all primary and secondary schools. A Language Institute was to be created for this purpose, and moreover for teacher training in the Malay language, and for research into the Malay language and its teaching. The Razak Report became a blueprint for future language policy. In the first Malayan Constitution of 1957, it was established that the national language should be Malay. The National Language Act of 1967 determined that the national language would be the sole official language of the country. (In 1967 Malay was renamed Bahasa Malaysia [Malaysian] in an effort to make nonMalays more willing to identify with it. In recent years, however, it has been officially renamed Bahasa Melayu [Malay D. In 1959 the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka was established to fulfil the following tasks: (1) the development and enrichment of the national language; (2) the promotion of literary talent especially in the national language; (3) printing and publication, or assistance in printing or publication, of books, magazines, pamphlets and other forms of literature in the national language

Malay - the national language of Malaysia 731

as well as in the other languages; and (4) the compilation and publication of a national language dictionary. By the end of 1966 475 titles had been published. At the beginning of 1967 about 70,000 Malay technological terms had been coined. 1970 saw the publication of a comprehensive Malay dictionary (Iskandar 1970). The Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka was also the center for the National Language Campaign to encourage the people to use the national language regularly in their daily lives. Sabah and Sarawak became part of Malaysia in 1963. Sabah proclaimed Malay as its official language in 1973, Sarawak did so in 1985 (Asmah 1994: 70). The implementation of Malay as a national language in Malaysia has not been without its problems. Both from the point of view of its practical application and from the point of view of its acceptance in a multi-ethnic society, it has been a more difficult process than the implementation of Indonesian in Indonesia (A veling 1990). Although upon Independence 80 per cent of the population knew some form of Malay, it did so in a variety of different dialects and sociolects, and usually not in the standardized literary form that became the national language (Aveling 1990). Before Independence, Chinese and Indians often only knew a form of trade Malay, whereas Malays themselves spoke various forms of vernacular Malay, which differ considerably from the national language. As a result, many Malaysians (including Malays) have had difficulties in adapting themselves to the standard form of the national language. Another factor has been the need for Malay to compete with English, a world language and "the language of judiciary and legislation, science and technology, business, commerce and industry and the mass media, in other words, the language of the controlling domains" (Nik Safiah 1970: 142) Non-Malays have sometimes seen the requirement of Malay in education and for all sorts of jobs as a form a discrimination. Their feeling is strenghtened by the government' s policy of giving preferential treatment to Malays in higher

education and in certain jobs where they were traditionally under-represented (Aveling 1990). On the other hand, nationalist Malays often find that the government has been too lax in implementing the national language. They resent the role of English as still an important language in public life. They also resent the re-introduction of English as a medium of instruction in tertiary education in 1993 (Aveling 1990). Nevertheless, an important consideration in the assessment of the implementation of Standard Malay in Malaysia should be the younger generation. They have accepted the national language and are fluent in it, irrespective of the different ethnic backgrounds of its individual members.

Spelling

The oldest form of Malay was written in a South Indian version of the Brahmi script, as is evidenced by Old Malay inscriptions from the 7th century AD onwards. After the introduction of Islam (around 1300 AD) the Arabic script was adopted, which in its adaptation to Malay became known as "Jawi".3 Although there was no spelling unity in the use of Jawi, when the Europeans arrived in Southeast Asia, the Riau standard of this script seems to have been predominant. The Europeans found the Roman script easier and more adequate for writing Malay, and they used it as early as the 17th century. There was little uniformity in their spelling conventions. Throughout the 19th century the Roman script expanded gradually. By the end of the 19th century the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society provided a spelling system for the transliteration of Malay names and words into English. In 1878 this system was adopted for official publications by the government of the Straits Settlements. Meanwhile a certain amount of uniformity in the use of Jawi was reached with the publication of several Jawi manuals in the late 19th century and the 20th century (ViklZir 1988: 11-13).

732

K. Alexander Adelaar

With the development of a more extensive education system for the Malays at the tum of the century, the Roman script became an instrument for the promotion of literacy. Wilkinson drafted a consistent spelling system which was adopted in 1904 in the Federated Malay States. The so-called "Wilkinson spelling" underwent some minor revisions made by Za'ba in the 30s. It was used in schools until 1972, when it was replaced by the "Ejaan Yang Disempurnakan" or "Perfected Spelling", the official spelling system in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei (Vik~r 1988: 11-27). Although far less widespread than the Roman script (or "Rumi"), Jawi is still used in public life in the form of a daily newspaper, government publications, street signs, names of buildings, trade labels and (sometimes) modem literature. In 1970 it was included in the Primary School curriculum (Abdul Razak and Mokhtar Mohd. 1977: ix). In this respect Malaysia is different

from Indonesia, where the use of Jawi is largely confined to religious literature. Singapore and Brunei The national languages of Singapore and Brunei are based on the standard Malay of Malaysia. Since the separation of Malaya and Singapore in 1965, Malay has remained the national language in Singapore, but it is only one of Singapore's four official languages together with English, Mandarin and Tamil. (See also Singapore in Adelaar and Prentice, this Atlas). The Brunei Constitution of 1959 states that Malay is the official language, although English may still be used for all official purposes. Brunei has followed the same trends as Malaysia. Most school books come from Malaysia. Brunei has its own Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka which besides publishing books and magazines also coins modem terms (Takdir 1975). See also Brunei in Adelaar and Prentice (this Atlas).

Notes 1. Penang, Singapore and Malacca, the so-called "Straits Settlements", were the first regions to come under British rule. They were followed by other parts of the Malay Peninsula which were politically divided into the Federated Malay States (Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Perak and Selangor) and the Unfederated Malay

States (Johore, Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan and Trengganu). 2. Presently officially known as Tengganu. 3. The frequent claim that Jawi is an adaptation of the Persian version of the Arabic script needs further investigation.

References The main source for this chapter is:

Other publications referred to in this chapter:

Takdir Alisjahbana, S. 1976 Language planning for modernization. The case of Indonesian and Malaysian. Contributions to the Sociology of Language 14. (Joshua A. Fishman ed.). The Hague Paris: Mouton.

Abdul Razak Abdul Hamid-Haji Mokhtar Mohd. Dom 1977 Belajar tulisan JawilLearn Jawi. Kuala Lumpur: Fajar Bakti. Abdullah Hassan (ed.) 1994 Language planning in Southeast Asia. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Malay - the national language of Malaysia

Andaya Barbara Watson-Leonard Y. Andaya 1982 A history of Malaysia. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan. Asmah Haji Omar 1994 "Nationism and exoglossia: the case of English in Malaysia", in: Abdullah Hassan (ed.), Language planning in Southeast Asia, 66-85. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Aveling, Harry 1990 "Perencanaan dan kebijakan bahasa di Malaysia" [Language planning and language policy in Malaysia], in: Kritis 5/2: 20-35. Iskandar (Teunku) (ed.) 1970 Kamus Dewan [Dewan dictionary]. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

733

Nik Safiah Karim 1994 "The controlling domains of Bahasa Melayu: the story of language planning in Malaysia", in : Abdullah Hassan (ed.), Language planning in Southeast Asia, 133150. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Vik¢r, Lars S. 1988 Perfecting spelling. Spelling discussions and reforms in Indonesia and Malaysia, 19001972 . Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk 1nstituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 133. Dordrecht (Holland)/ Providence (USA): Foris .

Philippines

Major languages of wider communication and Trade Languages of the Philippines Stephen A. Wurm The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Ten of the languages of the Philippines have over, to well over, a million speakers each, and at the same time, function as languages of wider communication (lingue franche). Figures given below are based on estimates made in the early to mid-1980s, and are likely to have increased considerably until the early nineties. On the basis of the mid-1980s estimates, the combined total of the speakers of the ten large, or major, languages amounted then to about 50,000,000, i.e. over 90% of the population. The languages are the following: Cebuano, about 12,000,000 Tagalog, about 10,000,000 first-language speakers, understood by about 15,000,000, used and comprehended to some extent by about 39,000,000. The present national language, Pilipino, is based on it. Filipino is to be developed from it to replace it. Ilocano, 8,000,000 Hiligaynon (Ilonggo), about 6,000,000 Bikol, about 3,500,000 Samar-Leyte (Waray-Waray), about 3,000,000 Kapampangan (Pampangan), about 2,000,000 Pangasinan, about 2,000,000 Maranao, about 1,000,000 (or less) Magindanao (Magindanaon), about 1,000,000 Maranao and Magindanao are linked by an intelligibility chain through the northern dialect of Magindanao, called Ilanum (lranun, Ilanon). There is 84% intelligibility of this dialect by other Magindanaon speakers, and 87% intelligibility of Ilanum (Iranun) by speakers of Maranao. Speakers of Ilanum (Iranun) themselves are

bilingual in both Magindanao (98% intelligibility) and Maranao (95% intelligibility). Intelligibility of Maranao by other speakers of Magindanao is only 60%, and that of Magindanao by Maranao speakers only 54% (Grimes 1992: 721-722). In addition to these ten major languages of wider communication, there are three trade languages in the Philippines which have wide currency. They are the following: Kuyonon (Cuyonon) of Cuyo Island between Panay and Palawan in the Central Philippines. It has 93,000 first language speakers, but is used as a trade language amongst a population of over 100,000 to the north, west and south. Tausug of Jolo Island in the Southern Philippines. It has about 350,000 first language speakers in the Philippines and well over 100,000 in Sabah, Malaysia. It is used as a far-flung trade language and lingua franca amongst a population of about 300,000 in the Southern Philippines and on southern Palawan, and also in north Sabah. Masbatefio (Masbatenyo) on Masbate and some neighbouring islands with about 350,000 first language speakers. It has 150,000 to 200,000 second language speakers and is used as a trade language and language of wider communication amongst a population of half a million or more to the northeast and the southwest. After briefly discussing this local large language and the trade languages, English will have to be mentioned as a language of wider communication in the Philippines. It is spoken by well over 50% of the population of the Philippines as a second language.

736

Stephen A. Wurm

References Grimes, Barbara F. (ed.) 1992 Ethnologue, Languages of the World. Dallas, Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, Inc. Moseley, Christopher-R.E. Asher (general eds.) 1994 Atlas of the World's Languages. London: Routledge.

Relevant map Major languages of wider communication and trade languages of the Philippines. Compiled by Stephen A. Wunn. Map 80.

Wunn, Stephen A.-Shiro Hattori (eds.) 1981-83 Language atlas of the Pacific area. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities.

Intercommunication between speakers of minor languages in the Philippines Stephen A. Wurm Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. In addition to the use of the ten major languages and the three Trade Languages in the Philippines for intercommunication between speakers of the very many other, minor, Philippine languages, there are very many instances of active or passive, one-way or two-way, bilingualism and one-way or mutual intelligibility of various levels involving such minor languages in the Philippines. What has been said here and shown on the relevant maps in this Atlas is by no means exhaustive: available information is fragmentary or lacking in many instances, and a very large amount of additional surveying, research and study would be required to expand the extant information to a more general coverage, increase its reliability and give a more fully coherent picture. What has been presented here is largely based on Wurm-Hattori (1981-83), McFarland (1980) and Moseley (1994) for the geographical distribution of the languages, and on the excellent work by Grimes (1992) for that and matters of bilingualism, intelligibility and the suitability of individual languages for purposes of intercommunication across language boundaries. The use of different names for the same languages in the various sources constitutes a problem. In Grimes 1992, the key language names used in the entries often differ from those found in Wurm-Hattori 1981-83, though the names used in the latter often appear amongst the sometimes quite lengthy lists of alternative names added to the key language names in Grimes 1992. To do justice to both sources and to assist users of the Atlas who may wish to consult the Philippine sections in Wurm-Hattori 1981-83 and Grimes 1992, names of individual languages are given in both the forms in which they appear in WurmHattori 1981-83, and in Grimes 1992 as the key

language names, with L preceding the former and E the latter. If the names in both sources are identical, L, E is placed before such names. If a name occurs only in one source (mostly Grimes 1992), only that name is mentioned with E before it. These principles apply to both the relevant maps and this text. As has been explained in the legends of the maps, various types of arrows have been employed to indicate different levels of applicability of languages in communication situations. Bilingualism is indicated by red solid arrows, whereas intelligibility or comprehension is shown by broken or dotted arrows. The head of an arrow points to the language whose speakers either use the language from which the arrow originates, as bilinguals or find the other language intelligible. Mostly, only cases have been considered for inclusion here in which the level of intelligibility is not much less than 70%, though some instances of lower percentages have occasionally been regarded as interesting for inclusion. If in a given case, the percentage of the degree of the intelligibility of a language by speakers of another language is lower than the percentage of the lexical similarity between the two languages involved, intelligibility has been regarded as natural intelligibility and resulting from the similarity between the languages of the speaker and the hearer. Such cases of intelligibility have been indicated in the maps by red dotted arrows. If, on the other hand, the percentage of lexical similarity is lower-often very significantly lower -than that of the level of the intelligibility of the language to its other-language hearers, the case is regarded as one of, generally acquired, passive bilingualism on the part of the hearers. Such cases have been shown on the maps by red broken

738

Stephen A. Wurm

arrows. If such passive bilingualism is mutual, i.e. both speakers understand each others' languages without actually speaking them in intercommunication situations, it is a case of twoway passive bilingualism. It is indicated on the maps by two parallel red broken arrows, with their heads pointing in opposite directions. If the available information for a given language only indicates levels of intelligibility, but not levels of lexical similarity, it is generally assumed that high levels denote passive bilingualism and lower levels natural intelligibility. There are widely differing levels of active bilingualism, passive bilingualism and intelligibility. In this Atlas, only two levels, high or fair to moderate, and limited, have been distinguished. The latter is marked by arrows bracketed at the head and the tail of the arrows used. Arrows without brackets denote the former. Bilingualism in one of the major languages has been indicated by green arrows, unbracketed or bracketed, with the major languages themselves represented on the maps by their capital initials in green, as explained in the legends. Active and passive bilingualism in, and intelligibility of, the major languages goes further than shown by the instances included in the relevant maps dealing with the minor languages of the Philippines in this Atlas. The geographical extent of the currency of the ten major languages and the three trade languages has been shown on the map of Large languages of Wider communication and Trade Languages of the Philippines in this Atlas. For the three trade languages (L Kuyonon E Cuyonon; L, E Tausug and L Masbatefio E Masbatenyo), bilingualism and intelligibility are, as is for minor languages, indicated by red arrows, while for the large languages, only green arrows are used. The full available information on bilingualism and intelligibility involving minor languages has been shown on the relevant maps. A number of cases will be mentioned here for illustration, moving from west to east and north to south on the maps. Abbreviations will be used: bil. = bilingualism, pass.hil. = passive bilingualism, n.intell. =natural intelligibility.

Northern Philippines: LAtta E Atta Faire: bil. in L Pamplona E Atta Pamplona and in L, E Ibanag. L, E Adasen: pass.bil. in Isnag. L ftawis E ftawit: two-way pass.bil. with L, E Ibanag. L Ga-dang E Ga'dang: n-intell. of L, E Gaddang. L, E Paranan: two-way pass.bil. with L Casiguran Dumagat E Agta, Casiguran Dumaget. E Arta: bil. in L Casiguran Dumagat E Agta, Casiguran Dumaget. L Karaw E Karao: bil. in L Inibaloi E Ibaloi, pass.bil. in L Kallahan E Kayapa Kallahan. Of the languages mentioned, bilingualism in the large language Ilocano is present with the speakers of L, E Adasen and L Itawis E Itawit, and limited bilingualism in it with those of E Arta. Central Philippines L Banton E Bantoanon: pass.bil. in L LoocAlcantara E Inonhan, n.intell. of L Romblon E Romblomanon. In addition, bil. in the large language Tagalog and limited bil. in the large language Hiligaynon. L. Romblon E Romblomanon: pass.bil. in L, E Aklanon. In addition, limited bil. in Tagalog and Hiligaynon. E Agta, Mt friga: two-way pass.bil. with E Agta, Mt Iraya, and one-way pass.bil. in L Rinconada Bikol E Bicolano Iriga. In addition, bil. in the large language Bikol (the same as L. Standard Bikol E Bicolano, Central) and in Tagalog. E Bicolano, Southern Cataduanes: bil. in L. Northern Cataduanes Bikol E Bicolano, Northern Cataduanes. In addition, bil. in Bikol and limited bil. in Tagalog. L Sorsogon (Waray) E Sorsogon, Waray: bil. in the Trade language L Masbatefio, E Masbatenyo. In addition, bil. in Bikol, Tagalog and the large language L. Samar-Leyte E Waray-Waray. Southern Philippines L. Subanon E Subanon Tuboy: limited bil. in the trade language Tausug, and n.intell. of L. Subanun E Subanen Central. In addition, limited bil. in the large language Cebuano.

Intercommunication between speakers of minor languages in the Philippines

L Balanguingui E Sama Balangingi: bil. in the trade language Tausug and two-way pass.bil. in L, E Sarna Central. L, E Surigaonon: n.intell. of L Dibabawon E Manobo Dibabawon and L Agusan Manobo E Manobo Agusan. In addition, bil. in Cebuano. L, E Kamayo: pass.bil. in L, E Butuanon, L, E Surigaonon and E Mansaka. In addition, bil. in Cebuano

739

L, E Binukid: two-way n.intell. with E Manobo Higaonon L, E Kalagan: two-way pass.bil. with L Kalagan E Kalagan, Kagan, pass.bil. in E Mansaka, n.intell. of L Tagakulu E Kalagan, Tagakulu. In addition, bil. in Cebuano.

References Grimes, Barbara F. (ed.) 1992 Ethnologue, Languages of the World. Dallas, Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, Inc. McFarland, Curtis 1980 A linguistic atlas of the Philippines. Tokyo, University of Foreign Studies, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.

Moseley, Christopher-R.E. Asher (general eds.) 1994 Atlas of the World's Languages. London: Routledge. Wurrn, Stephen A.-Shiro Hattori (eds.) 1981-83 Language Atlas of the Pacific Area. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities.

Relevant maps Bilingualism and lingue franche - Northern Philippines. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurrn. Map 81. Bilingualism and lingue franche - Central Philippines. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurrn. Map 82.

Bilingualism and lingue franche - Southern Philippines. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurrn. Map 83.

Taiwan

The Hngue franche in Taiwan Paul len-kuei Li The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction Leading Austronesian scholars such as Otto Dahl and Robert Blust have recognized the fact that the Austronesian languages in Taiwan (see the Map Taiwan: Aboriginal languages (Formosan languages) are quite diversified, when compared with all the other Austronesian languages outside Taiwan. As far as we can ascertain, no Formosan language has ever served as a lingua franca among all the different native ethnic groups on the island. Nevertheless, a few languages became dominant in certain areas, such as Siraya in the southwestern plains of Taiwan recorded during the Dutch period (1642-1662), and Basay in the northern part of Taiwan as reported during the Spanish period (1626-1642). Even today, a particular dialect may become dominant for a certain language, such as the Squliq dialect of Atayal, the Isbukun dialect of Bunun, and the central dialect of Amis. During the Japanese period (1895-1945), Japanese became a lingua franca for speakers of different Formosan languages. That is still true among the older speakers today. Ever since the Nationalist government took over Taiwan in 1945, Mandarin has become a lingua franca for younger speakers (middle aged and below) of diverse linguistic backgrounds from all over Taiwan. Both Japanese and Mandarin acquired the status of lingue franche among the different Formosan ethnic groups because Taiwan's rulers attained political and cultural dominance over the natives. It is interesting to note that no native Formosan language has ever acquired such a status. Japanese continued to be used by the natives and Chinese living on Taiwan many years after the Japanese departed. The latter group, who were educated by the Japanese, have spoken Japanese or Taiwanese (a Southern Min dialect of Chinese)

code-mixing with Japanese. There are a number of Japanese loanwords in Taiwanese and Formosan languages spoken today. The descendants of the plains tribes now speak Taiwanese as their first language. These tribes include the Kavalan, Ketagalan (including Basay and Luilang), Taokas, Papora, Babuza, Hoanaya, Pazeh and Siraya, as well as the Thao people who live in the Sun-Moon Lake area. In the past two decades or so, many natives from the mountain areas have moved to live and work in urban or suburban areas of Taiwan. They speak Mandarin as their second or third language, while their children speak Mandarin as their first language. 2. Siraya The Dutch missionaries devised an orthographic (Romani sed) system for the Siraya language, which was formerly spoken in the Tainan area, a political centre during the Dutch period and subsequently during the Cheng regime (16621683) and the Ching sovereignty (1683-1895). The natives were taught to write in Siraya, including biblical translations and land deeds. They continued to write in Siraya for more than one hundred years after the Dutch left. Siraya exerted its influence over neighbouring languages in the southwestern plains in Taiwan, Taivoan to the east and Makatao to the south, and became a lingua franca in the whole area (see the Map Taiwan: Aboriginal languages (Siraya and adjacent languages). All three ethnic groups became essentially sinicized more than one hundred years ago. The language data for Siraya, Taivoan and Makatao is collected by Ogawa (see Tsuchida and Yamada 1991) indicate that they became rather similar and look as if they were three major dialect groups of the same language, Siraya.

742

Paul len-kuei Li

These natives have lost their linguistic and cultural identities. Yet fieldworkers often notice that their Taiwanese, the major Chinese dialect spoken in Taiwan, has some kind of 'accent' and flavour distinct from the more general Taiwanese. Their Taiwanese has a peculiar rising intonation. They have also simplified part of Taiwanese grammar and lexicon. This is true not only of the Siraya descendants, but also of some other sinicized Formosan tribes, including a few Thao and Pazeh speakers who speak Taiwanese in their daily life. No detailed study of this sociolinguistic phenomenon has been carried out to date. 3. Basay Spanish sources indicate that in the early 17th century there were at least three aboriginal languages in the Taipei area: Basay, Senar and Tamchui (see the Map Taiwan: Aboriginal languages (Approximate former distribution of aboriginal tribes in northern Taiwan». However, only Basay survived by the end of the 19th century, according to research undertaken by Ino, Ogawa, Asai, etc. Basay exerted greater influence on the neighbouring languages, including Kavalan spoken in the northeastern plains of Taiwan. Father Esquivel, a Spanish missionary in northern Taiwan, said that "all [Kavalan] villages are said to be large in size, and a common language is spoken in all of them, indeed, in general, throughout the island-the Bacay tongue. Despite the use of another language in a particular place, Bacay is still spoken as a second language." (See Borao 1993.) Esquivel's word about the wide use of Basay (he spelled it Bacay) was an exaggeration. He spent only three years (1630-1633) in the Taipei area, and never visited other parts of the island. His hearsay report that Basay was spoken all over Taiwan is definitely false. De los Angeles, another Spanish missionary, spent six years (1636-1642) in the same area and knew more about the actual linguistic situation in Taiwan. In describing the Formosan natives, he stated, "The languages they speak are many: each province has its own, so do different villages. There is a common language spoken in the region where the Spaniards are in control,

called Basay, spoken even up to Torboan where gold could be found. This language could be understood by those living along the Tamsui river, although they have their own dialects." (See Borao 1993.) The Spanish were in control of northern Taiwan for 16 years. It seems clear that Basay was a lingua franca only in the northern part of Taiwan, especially in and near the Taipei area, including the border area between Basay and Kavalan. 4. The Squliq dialect of Atayal The Atayalic group comprises Atayal and Sediq, each with many dialects of its own. Atayal, in tum, consists of two major dialects, Squliq (Sqoleq) and Ctuli2 (Ts'ole'). This group was spoken in a mountain area of the central part of Taiwan about three hundred years ago. It then expanded and dispersed to the east and to the north until it covered the northern half of the island, mostly mountainous areas, since the 17th century. As stated in Tsuchida (1983: map 4), "Sqoleq dialects are spoken in the central part of the Atayal habitat and are quite homogeneous, whereas Ts'ole' dialects are distributed in marginal areas, and are rather heterogeneous." The Squliq dialects occupy not only the major part of the geographical area of the Atayal habitat, but they are also known and spoken by many speakers of Ctuli2 dialects, whereas most speakers of Squliq know nothing about any ctu1i2 dialect. The homogeneity and large continuous area of the Squliq dialect group indicates that its expansion is fairly recent, and that some Ctuli2 dialects may have recently been replaced and some others will soon be replaced by Squliq. However, Squliq has not extended beyond its Atayal territory, not even to Sediq, a closely related but mutually unintelligible language in the Atayalic group. The Taroko dialect is the most widely known and populous among the different Sediq dialects: Paran (Tkdaya), Toda and Taroko. 5. The Isbukun dialect of Bunun Bunun covers most of the southern half of Taiwan. There are five main dialects of Bunun:

The linguefranche in Taiwan

Takituduh, Takibakha, Takbanuaz, Takivatan and Isbukun. Roughly speaking, the first two dialects are located to the north, the third and fourth dialects in the centre, and the fifth to the south, mostly in Nant'ou, Kaoshiung and Hualien counties, as well as parts of Taitung and Pingtung couties. Isbukun occupies the largest area in the Bunun habitat and is more widely known by speakers of different Bunun dialects. It is the only dialect that is geographically distributed in all five counties. Unfortunately a detailed dialect survey of Bunun has not been carried out to date. Biblical translations into Bunun have been done only in Isbukun, which is considered to be the prestige

743

dialect of Bunun. A few speakers of other Formosan languages, such as Rukai, know Bunun through Isbukun. 6. The Central Dialect of Amis Amis covers the eastern coastal areas of Taiwan. It comprises five major dialects: Sakizaya, Northern, Taivalong-Vata'an, Central and Southern. The central dialect is most widely known and considered to be the prestige dialect of Amis. Biblical translations, pedagogical materials and the only Amis dictionary in print are all based on this dialect.

References Borao, Jose Eugenio 1993 "The aborigines of northern Taiwan according to 17th century Spanish sources", Newsletter of Taiwan History Field Research 27:98-120. Li, Paul J.K. 1994 "Formosan vs. non-Formosan features in some Austronesian languages in Taiwan", in: Paul Li et al. (eds.), Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan. Institute of History and Philology. Taipei, Taiwan: Academia Sinica.

Relevant map Formosan languages in Taiwan. Compiled by Paul Jen-kuei Li. Map 84.

Tsuchida, Shigeru 1983 "Austronesian languages in Taiwan (Formosa)", in: S.A. Wurm-Shiro Hattori (eds.), Language atlas of the Pacific area, part 2. Pacific Linguistics C-67. Canberra: The Australian Academy of Humanities, III collaboration with the Japan Academy. Tsuchida, Shigeru-Yukihiro Yamada 1991 Linguistic materials of the Formosan sinicized populations I: Siraya. Japan: University of Tokyo.

South-East Asia (Continental)

Burmese as a lingua franca David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Burmese is the national language of Myanmar (Burma). It has about 32 million first-language speakers including all of those considered 'Burman' by race in official statistics (now probably 28 million), as well as the Rakhine (Arakanese) who speak a dialect, and a substantial portion of the Mon and 'foreign' races (mainly of South Asian origin, but also with a substantial overseas Chinese population) and smaller numbers of the Shan and other races. In addition as lingua franca of all towns and most markets and the medium of all but the lowest-level primary education and of massive nationwide literacy campaigns from the early 1970s to today, it is spoken and to a lesser extent written by at least another ten million. Naturally as the national language it is regularly used in all but those areas dominated by other languages such as the Kachin State in the north, parts of the Shan, Kayah and Kayin (Karen) States in the east, and a small portion of the Rakhine State in the west. Even between the different ethnic insurgencies, Burmese must often serve as the lingua franca. While English has substantial status as the ex-colonial language, Burmese has been the dominant language, and the Burmans the dominant group in the area, for nearly a thousand years. The standard dialect of Burmese is said to be based on the educated speech of Mandalay, the former royal capital until 1885; for practical purposes the extremely similar variety spoken in Yangon (formerly Rangoon) is more of a model nowadays. For some of the other races of Myanmar Burmese is a relatively closely-related dialect; this is true for the Rakhine (formerly Arakanese) whose dialect is easily mutually intelligible with Burmese, and also for smaller groups such as the Tavoyan and Merguese in the south, Danu, Intha and Taungyo in the northeast,

and Yaw in the northwest. These dialects are heavily influenced by standard Burmese, and some are receding or being replaced by Burmese; speakers total approximately 2.5 million. The last reliable census based on a full attempt at enumeration in Myanmar was conducted in 1931 ; materials from the 1941 census were lost as a result of the Japanese invasion. As there have been continuous insurgencies on virtually every border since independence, the central government has no effective way to determine the population of much of the north and east of the country. The most recent census available was taken in 1983 and is said to be based on police registration records rather than an actual enumeration; but it is very incomplete for the Kachin, Shan and Karen States in the north and east, and has substantial gaps in other areas as well. United Nations estimates for population are thus substantially higher than those of the government. The following table gives the 1983 census distribution for 'race', which in most cases would also indicate first language. United Nations (1991: 140) estimates a total population of 46.3 million for 1995; the 1983 census gave a total of 35,307,913 including a laughably low total for 'other indigenous races'; UN estimates for 1983 were about 36 million which in my view was still too low. On the other hand UN estimates assume zero net migration whereas in fact the brutality of the current military government (SLORC, the so-called State Law and Order Restoration Council) has led to massive movements of refugees into Thailand, Bangladesh, India and China. Burmese is not used to a significant extent outside Myanmar, other than by Burmese expatriates who form substantial communities in Thailand, Perth in West Australia and smaller numbers in Sydney, Melbourne, London, Los

746

David Bradley

Angeles and elsewhere. A speculative estimate of Burmese living overseas would be on the order of 100,000. However many of these were of AngloIndian or Anglo-Burman background (i.e. of mixed parentage), left before or soon after independence in 1947, and have now assimilated into their new communities. Two other very large groups have left since 1947: a very large proportion of the South Asians and Chinese have returned to their countries of origin, because of official discrimination which at times became quite violent. Table 1. Census of Burma 1983, 'Race' 'Race' Burman Shan Karen Rakhine Mon Chin Kachin Kayah 'other indigenous' 'foreign'

number

23,532,433 2,890,437 2,122,825 1,536,725 826,801 745,463 465,484 141,028 33,227 1,830,485

per cent

66.6 8.2 6.0 4.4 2.3 2.1 1.3 0.4 0.1 5.2

Another much larger Burmese-speaking expatriate group is now in the Chittagong Hill Tract of Bangladesh and adjacent Tripura State in northeastern India: these are the Rakhine or Arakanese. The first wave of this migration was triggered by the Burmese conquest of the independent kingdom of Arakan in 1784, and consisted of Buddhist members of the Arakanese royal court and their supporters; these people now are called Marma and have lived outside the country for over two centuries; smaller numbers of Buddhists have followed during the period of British administration since 1826. They are sometimes lumped with the much larger numbers of people, especially Moslems, who have fled government terror over the last twenty years, mostly into Bangladesh which is a Moslem country and is thus somewhat more sympathetic

to them than India. These people are called Mogh or Magh, the Bengali term for Arakanese. Their numbers fluctuate and periodically some are persuaded to return, but at present there are several hundred thousand and the number of new refugees registered with the UNHCR reached 288,000 by early 1993; most have since returned. Naturally these people speak the Rakhine dialect of Burmese; the Marma speak a more conservative variety. The learning of Burmese as a second language in schools and through adult literacy campaigns is made much more difficult by the fact that Burmese, like many languages of the area, is diglossic. The literary High Burmese, used also in formal spoken contexts such as radio and television news and so on, has major differences from the spoken Low Burmese which is what most second-language speakers actually need to use as a spoken lingua franca. For details of these differences see Bradley (1977) and Allott (1985). For example, almost every verb and noun particle has a different and in most cases unrelated form; the plural is indicated optionally (but infrequently) in the spoken Low by the suffix [twe], while in the literary High it is much more frequently shown by the suffix [mja]. Words written with the final consonant (which is itself not pronounced in final position) corresponding to initial [p] have the vowel [i], [e] or [e] in the spoken Low, but all such have the vowel [i] in the literary High; for example 'country' is [pje] in the Low and [pji] in the High; some other sporadic differences exist as well. Also, some noun and verb stems differ. One example is in the name of the country; the spoken Low form [b;)ma] was the source of the name used externally until 1989, Burma; the literary High form [mj;)ma] is the source of the present name Myanmar. There are seven other officially-recognised languages of Myanmar: the languages of the seven largest 'races' after the Burmans. Each of these is the local official language of a state named after the group: the Rakhine State and Chin State in the west; the Kachin State in the north; and the Shan, Kayah, Kayin (Karen) and Mon States in the east. Of these, Rakhine (Arakanese) as noted above is a

Burmese as a lingua franca

dialect of Burmese and its speakers use mainly standard Burmese in school and other official contexts; when they choose to write Arakanese there are some very minor differences of spelling and syntax, but the pronunciation is much more distinct. Chin, Kachin, Kayah and Karen are Tibeto-Burman languages more or less closely related to Burmese; in fact the category Chin includes a diverse but homogeneous range of very similar languages and dialects, and the categories Kayah and Karen comprise, along with a number of smaller groups to their north, a single cluster of closely related languages and dialects. For more details on thesee languages, see the discussion in Moseley (1994) by Bradley. Kachin is a composite category with one language, Jinghpaw, serving as lingua franca; see the separate discussion of that language which is also spoken in China and India, with a few speakers in Thailand. Of the languages not related to Burmese, Shan is a Dai language and Mon is a Mon-Khmer or Austroasiatic language. There are major dialect differences within the category of Shan; these are discu~sed further along with other Dai languages, many of which including several of the varieties of Shan are used as locallingue franche of valleys in Myanmar, southwestern China, Thailand, Laos and northern Vietnam and formerly in northeastern India. In earlier days Mon was the dominant language of much of what is now western and central Thailand as well as southern Myanmar; see the separate discussion of

747

premodern empires and their languages for further details. The six official languages which are not varieties of Burmese (Chin, Kachin, Kayah, Kayin (Karen), Shan and Mon) may be used in early stages of education in the relevant states, but often are not where the population is heterogeneous, as in many towns. These languages may also be seen in public notices but Burmese is much more prevalent, even within the non-Burman states of Myanmar. They are used extensively in daily life, and Burmans who live in these areas often learn a small amount of the state language. However the tendency to use Burmese is very great and is growing. In summary, standard Burmese is spoken as a first dialect by about 28 million or over sixty per cent of the popUlation; as a second dialect by a further 2.5 million; bilingually with another language of Myanmar, an Indian language, or a variety of Chinese by about 1.5 million; and as a second language used as lingua franca and national language by another ten million. It is thus regularly used by nearly 97 per cent of the population of about 46.3 million. Outside Myanmar its use is limited but there are several hundred thousand speakers of the Arakanese dialect in Bangladesh and India, and perhaps another hundred thousand expatriates born in Myanmar whose use depends on their attachment to the country and how recently they left it.

References Allott, Anna J. 1985 "Language policy and language planning in Burma", in: D. Bradley (ed.), Language policy, language planning and sociolinguistics in South-East Asia. Papers in South-East Asian Linguistics No.9. Pacific Linguistics A67, 131-154. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.

Relevant map Burmese and Yunnanese Chinese. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 87.

Bradley, David 1977 "Modernization and diglossia in Burmese", Osmania Papers in Linguistics 3: 1-12. United Nations 1991 World population prospects. Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, Population Studies No.120. New York: United Nations.

Kachin David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Kachin is the Burmese name for a culture complex which includes speakers of six languages. The largest group and the one whose language dominates is the Jinghpaw, whose autonym is tJir] 31 pho 731 . From the name for this group comes the name used in China, Jingpo, and the name used in India, Singpho. This language is written in a widely-used romanisation whose major defect is that it does not indicate tones. Also included in this complex group are the Gauri or Kauri, who speak a closely-related dialect of Jinghpaw; and several groups whose

languages are in fact closer to Burmese than to Jinghpaw, but who have lived together with the Jinghpaw for so long that their culture, kinship structure and residence pattern have converged into a single system. These Burmish groups include the Atsi, Maru, Lashi, Pola and in some areas also the Ngochang. The following table shows various different names for these Burmish groups.

Table 1. Names of Burmish groups included in Kachin

Autonym

Jinghpaw name

Bunnese name

Chinese name

tsai 31 va 51 l5 31 V;)51 b 31 t/hi(k)51 IJd 31 t/haIJ 31 pd31 Ia 55

Atsi Maru Lashi Ngochang

Zi Maru Lashi Maingtha

Caiwa Langsu Laqi Achang Pola

Leach (1954) incorrectly claims that the Lisu, speakers of another Tibeto-Burman language, have also entered the Kachin culture complex. While a few individuals of this remarkably adaptable group may have done so, the vast majority of the 850,000 Lisu of China, Myanmar, Thailand and India have not. Nearly all of the speakers of Atsi, Maru, Lashi and Pola, and many of those of Ngochang, are fully bilingual in Jinghpaw from childhood. They use the Jinghpaw romanisation as their medium of literacy. While there are some moves to develop separate romanisations for some of these languages, these have not met with much success so far.

Official population statlstlcs are very incomplete for the Kachin heartland, the part of northern Myanmar including the Kachin State and parts of the northern Shan State. Outside the largest towns, this area is not under the control of the central government; so the 1983 census was not conducted in many areas. For the areas counted, the total population was 465,484 Kachins, which includes members of all the Burmish groups listed above as well. A more accurate current estimate would be nearly double this; see below. The distribution of these Kachin is shown in the following table.

750

David Bradley

Table 2. Kachin in Myanmar 1983 Census StatelDistrict

Population

Per cent of state/division

Per cent of Kachin in Myanmar

Kachin State Shan State Mandalay Division Sagaing Division Rangoon other

312,195 117,937 21,538 6,637 2,786 4,391

38.1 3.8 0.5 0.2 0.1

67.1 25.3 4.6 1.4 0.6 0.9

Total

465,484

l.3

100.0

In China the 1990 census indicates a Jingpo population of 119,209 who live mainly in Dehong Prefecture, with smaller numbers along the southwestern border of Nujiang Prefecture and scattered in Baoshan, Lincang and Simao Prefectures. In India the Singpho were enumerated at 1,536 in Tirap and Lohit Districts of southeastern Arunachal Pradesh in 1971; more recent figures are not available. In Thailand there have been small numbers of Kachins for over twenty years, mainly acting as liaison for the Kachin Independence Army; in the late 1980s a small village was established with Royal assistance in northern Chiangmai Province; in fact this village is mainly Atsi and Maru, not Jinghpaw. In China the Ngochang have achieved separate status as the Achang nationality, and numbered 27,708 in 1990. These Ngochang live concentrated in a couple of valleys, and have there integrated themselves into a Ddi -like valley culture; but some other Ngochang in Myanmar operate instead within the Kachin system. In Myanmar there are some Ngochang families who live in Shan villages, usually as the village blacksmith, in the Kachin State. As a result of the highly-organised and successful Kachin Independence Army, much of the Kachin territory in northern Myanmar was independent of central control until 1993; for a recent account see Lintner (1990). Naturally the language of the KIA is Jinghpaw, though many educated Kachins also speak Burmese and

English. This movement has also trained similar separatist groups from northeastern India, so there are small numbers of Naga and other anti-India rebels who speak some Jinghpaw. In many Kachin villages there are members of several of the different component groups; for example Dai et al (1985) describes Pola as spoken in a village with 22 Jinghpaw houses, 15 Pola houses, 6 Maru houses and one Atsi house. This level of diversity is not unusual, especially in the southeastern part of the Kachin range in the northern Shan State of Myanmar and in China where a majority of the Kachin population is not Jinghpaw. Xu and Xu (1984) indicate that about 75 per cent of the' Jingpo' nationality in China are Atsi, with smaller numbers who speak Maru, Pol a and Lashi. In most mixed villages each Burmish group operates as a Kachin exogamous patrilineal clan, so if the father is from one of the Burmishspeaking groups, the mother must have a different first language from her husband. Grandparents could therefore represent up to four languages, but marriage preferences tend to lead to repeated marriages between the same clans. The clan identity is acquired from the father, but children also speak the mother's language, especially if it forms a substantial group in the village. Thus, people of one of the Burmish backgrounds may be bilingual in their father's and their mother's language, and if neither of these is Jinghpaw they will early on become trilingual and use Jinghpaw as their medium of education, literacy and lingua

Kachin

franca within the group as a whole. I have encountered many MaruiAtsilJinghpaw trilinguals and some LashilNgochang/ Jinghpaw trilinguals; other combinations doubtless exist. Naturally, in addition to these first languages, many Kachins also learn second languages such as Shan for trade with adjacent valleys, Burmese in Myanmar, Chinese if resident in China, English as the main foreign language in the education systems of Myanmar and China, and so on. The following table shows my current estimate of the numbers and locations of the various

751

component groups of the Kachin in 1995. Overall, the Jinghpaw language is spoken by nearly a million people, of whom about two thirds are Jinghpaw and nearly one third are members of the Kachin culture complex but with home languages more closely related to Burmese than to Jinghpaw. There are smaller numbers of Lisu, Rawang and other groups of the Kachin area who have also learned some Jinghpaw and use it as the lingua franca of the hills of northern and northeastern Myanmar.

TabLe 3. Estimated Kachin popUlation 1992 Group

Myanmar

China

India

Thailand

Jinghpaw Atsi Maru Ngochang Lashi Pola

630,000 80,000 90,000 10,000 25,000

15,000 90,000 10,000 30,000 5,000 2,000

2,000

500 20 100 5 5

Total

650,000 170,000 100,000 40,000 30,000 2,000

References Dai Qingxia-Fu Ailan-Liu Juhuang 1985 "Jingpozu Bolahua gaikuang" ["A brief description of the Pola vernacular spoken by Jingpo nationality"], Minzu Yuwen 1985/6:5671. Dai Qingxia-Xu Xijian 1983 "Langsuhua chutan" ["A tentative enquiry into the Langsu (Maru) dialect"], Yuyan Yanjiu 5, 1983/2: 219-242. Leach, Edmund 1954 PoliticaL systems of highLand Burma. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Relevant map Kachin and Lahu. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 90.

Lintner, Bertil 1990 Land ofjade: ajoumey through insurgent Burma. Edinburgh: Kiscadale; Bangkok: White Lotus. Moseley, Christopher (ed.) 1992 Atlas of the worLd's Languages. London: Routledge. Xu Xijian-Xu Guizhen 1984 Jingpozu yuyanjianzhi (Zaiwayu) [Outline of the language of the Jingpo people (Zaiwa language)]. Beijing: Nationalities Publishing House.

Lahu David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Lahu is a Tibeto-Burman language spoken as a first language by about 650,000 people in southwestern Yunnan in China (about 360,000 in the 1990 census), the Shan State of Myanmar, northwestern Laos and northern Thailand (about 65,000 in 1995). It is divided into two main dialects, Black (Lahu Na) and Yellow (Lahu Shi), with many subvarieties; for details see Bradley (1979a). It forms part of the Burmese-Lolo subgroup as reconstructed in Bradley (1979b). The Black Lahu dialect with subvarieties spoken by about two-thirds of the Lahu is the general lingua franca and so most other Lahu can also understand and speak this dialect to a degree; but few Black Lahu speakers bother with other dialects, and most claim not to understand them. Orthographies for Black Lahu have been developed; first a Baptist version from the 1920s slightly revised in the 1950s which is fairly widely known among Baptist Lahu (a substantial group, especially in Myanmar and Thailand), and more recently a pinyin version for use in China which is said to be widely taught in schools there; and two slightly different versions for Black and Yellow Lahu developed by the Catholic missionaries in Myanmar but not at all widely used apart from the few Catholic converts. Black Lahu is also the dominant lingua franca among the mountain people in this area, so that members of various other smaller or more recently arrived groups learn it to some degree as a second language. There are probably some 250,000 speakers with varying levels of ability whose first languages include closely related Akha (550,000 speakers, of whom perhaps a fifth have some knowledge of Lahu) and southern Lisu (about 50,000 speakers, of whom about half know some Lahu). A smaller proportion of the Wa (well over 800,000 speakers, with perhaps one in twenty

who can speak some Lahu) and other very small groups (Bana and Sila in Laos and various similar groups in Myanmar and China) also use Lahu in this way. The proportion of non-Lahu males speaking Lahu is much higher than than for females. There is also some intermarriage, especially of Lahu women and Lisu men; mixed villages in which Lahu is gradually taking over from Lisu are not uncommon in Thailand. Marriages in which Akhas or Was marry Lahus and move into Lahu villages are also fairly frequent where these groups are in contact. As a result of this bilingualism and the dominant position of Lahu, there are numerous Lahu loanwords in some of these languages, especially Akha.

The development of the opium trade in the Lahu area, the heart of the Golden Triangle comprising the eastern Shan State of Myanmar, northwestern Laos and the hilly parts of northern Thailand, has led to extensive contact with Yunnanese Chinese middlemen; in many opiumproducing villages there is at least one Chinese man with a local wife running a small shop, extending credit and buying the cash crops including opium. These men and their associated co-traders in the valleys also naturally speak some Lahu. Other itinerant peddlars also use Lahu as a lingua franca in Lahu and other villages where it is spoken. After the defeat of the Nationalist Chinese by the Communists, a number of Nationalist armies retreated into the Shan State of Myanmar in 1950 and stayed there, making occasional raids into China but supporting themselves mainly by taking over the transport of the opium crop; for more details see the discussion of Yunnanese or Haw Chinese. Many of these Haw Chinese soldiers married local girls, especially Lahu, and the

754

David Bradley

armies recruited local men incuding many Lahu, Lisu and Wa men to replenish their ranks. In this way Lahu has also become one of the several lingue franche associated with this trade, along with Yunnanese Chinese and Shan. These armies were supposed to leave Myanmar in the mid1950s according to a UN-brokered agreement; and indeed many were airlifted to Taiwan, including a small number of the Lahu and other soldiers recruited after 1950. Those who remained in the area moved south to the Thai border and continued their close association with the Lahu, Lisu and other groups; indeed many Lisu villages in Thailand consist mainly of the descendants of mixed marriages with these Chinese. These Lisu are called Chinese-Lisu by the Lahu and Akha of the area, and their Lisu is inundated with Chinese loanwords; see Hope forthcoming. The one Kachin village in Thailand comprises ex-soldiers of the Kachin Independence Army who have settled in Thailand. Many of them have married Lahu women, and the lingua franca of this village is Lahu though at least a dozen other languages including Jinghpaw Kachin are also spoken. Conversely, in the valleys and therefore at markets a different lingua franca is in use, by Lahu speakers as well as others. The valley languages are Dai languages; for details of their use see the map of Dai lingue franche. As well, many Lahu along with other hill groups use some Yunnanese Chinese for dealings with that group. An interesting sidelight on the practical implementation of the nationalities policy in China concerns a Burmese-Lolo group who call themselves Kucong or Lahu, and who are called Cosung in Vietnam. Their language is quite closely related to Lahu but far from mutually intelligible; in 1982 the approximately 50,000 Kucong in China were included in the category of unclassified national minorities. They live in widely scattered areas of Yunnan but mainly far to the east of the main Lahu concentrations, with about 5,000 in northernmost Vietnam recognised

as a distinct nationality there. In the early 1980s the Kucong applied for separate status as a national minority in China, but in 1985 this application was rejected and they were instead amalgamated with the Lahu. It was said at the time that when the Lahu and Kucong representatives met, they were suprised at how similar their languages were and accepted the decision; of course they had no alternative. This accounts for part of the 35 per cent increase in the Lahu population of China, from 304,174 in 1982 to 411,476 in 1990; a natural increase of just under twenty per cent like similar nationalities, plus the 50,000 Kucong; and in part for a decrease of the unclassified national minorities category from 881,838 in 1982 to 749,341 in 1990; the rest of the decrease is presumably due to similar causes. However it is most unlikely that this decision will have any practical implications for the Kucong, as Lahu is only used for official purposes including education in the Lahu 'autonomous' counties, not in areas elsewhere where the group is less concentrated. Lahu is also used by a refugee population of about a thousand in the United States. This is a Yellow Lahu group from northwestern Laos who left there in 1975 and were eventually resettled to Utah; they later chose to move to California. An even smaller number of Lahu ex-Nationalist Chinese soldiers, evacuated to Taiwan in the mid1950s, still lives in Taiwan. In summary, Lahu has about 650,000 Ll speakers of whom about a third use non-native Black Lahu dialect as a lingua franca, probably a quarter of a million L2 speakers who use this same dialect as a lingua franca, and 50,000 Kucong in China who are officially lumped in with the Lahu but do not speak it. Many Lahu speakers also use other lingue franche such as Yunnanese Chinese and various Dai languages; and those who are educated also use the national language of the country of education: Chinese, Burmese, Thai or Lao (or English in the case of some refugees).

Lahu

755

References Bradley, David 1979a Lahu dialects. Canberra: Australian National University Press 1979b Proto-Loloish. Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies Monograph Series No. 39. LondonlMalmo: Curzon Press

Relevant map Kachin and Lahu. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 90.

1991 Thai hill tribes phrasebook. Melbourne: Lonely Planet. Hope, Edward R. forthcoming Lisu-English dictionary (southern dialect). Edited by David Bradley. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

Nagamese David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Nagamese, also known as Naga Pidgin or Naga Assamese, is a pidgin spoken by first-language speakers of various so-called Naga languages in northeastern India, and used by outsiders for contact with these groups. It is used by Naga people both for contact between different Naga groups as well as for contact with outsiders. While it is a stabilised pidgin with about a million speakers, it has no official status, no agreed superposed standard and as yet extremely limited creolisation. The Naga area includes what is now Nagaland State of India, most of Tirap District of Arunachal Pradesh, the northern portion of Manipur State and the adjacent Naga areas of Myanmar (Burma). The total population of this area is some 1.5 million, over 1.1 million of whom are Naga. All Naga languages are Tibeto-Burman; they fall into two main subgroups, northern and southern. From a genetic linguistic point of view, the Northern Naga languages are closely related to major languages of the plains of Assam and hills to its south, including Bodo, Garo, Tripuri and others, and with them form the Baric subgroup of Tibeto-Burman. The Southern Naga languages are closely related to languages to the immediate south including Manipuri or Meithei, Lushai or Mizo, and the various Kuki and Chin languages, which together comprise the Kuki-Chin-Naga subgroup of Tibeto-Burman. Of these related groups, the Bodo, Garo, Tripuri, Manipuri and Lushai or Mizo are by far the largest and most widely extended. The Bodo, Tripuri and Manipuri groups each established large and successful Hindu-style kingdoms; the Tripuri and Manipuri ones survived until modem times. The Bodo were the dominant group in the Brahmaputra valley heartland of Assam prior to the advent of Indic and other more recent arrivals; they were first conquered by the Ahom, a Dai.

group who came from northern Burma in the thirteenth century; the usual date given is 1228. The Ahom provided the name of the area, Assam; but a much more pervasive influence came from the Indic-speaking influx, the Assamese. Assamese itself shows evidence of prior creolisation; much of the current Assamese population must be descendants of speakers of Bodo or other non-Indic languages. With an estimated 15 million speakers, Assamese is one of the Schedule VIII official languages of India and the dominant language of Assam State; but within this same area there are still over one million speakers of Bodo and closely related languages such as Lalung and Dimasa, all sometimes grouped under the term Kachari. Only one small piece of this vast domain remained under indigenous rulers for long enough to become a princely state under the British; this was Cooch Behar, now a part of West Bengal immediately to the west of Assam, under a Hindu dynasty of the Koch, a western branch of the Bodo which extends into plains areas of southeastern Nepal as well as what is now northern West Bengal and westernmost Assam. The Bodo have been conducting active and sometimes violent agitation since the late 1980s for a Bodoland State comprising much of the north and east of Assam, and Bodo in a Devanagari script has local official status in Assam. Another substantial Baric group is the Tripuri, the dominant group in Tripura, which survived as one of the princely states (sometimes called 'Hill Tipperah') in the British Indian system and later became a separate state of India. The autonym for the Tripuri language is Kak Barak 'language of the people', also sometimes written Kok Borok. This language is still spoken by over half a million people and written in a romanised form, but the area has been swamped by a long-standing

758

David Bradley

Bengali influx which has increased in the recent past and now comprises three quarters of the state's population. The third large Baric group is the Garo, close to half a million speakers in western Meghalaya State of India and a much smaller number in adjacent hilly areas of Assam and Bangladesh. While this group did not establish a single Hindusty Ie kingdom based on a major valley, it remained dominant in its area, was successfully converted to Christianity and now uses a romanised script which has local official status in Meghalaya though the state language of education is English. The valley of Manipur provided another suitable setting for a Hindu kingdom, dominated by the local Manipuri (autonym Meithei) who now number over a million, of whom about 95 per cent are in Manipur State where they form nearly twothirds of the total population; most of the others in that state speak closely related Kuki-Chin-Naga languages. This was another of British India's princely states which became one of India's states. Under Bengali influence like Tripura, Manipur escaped massive migration due to its remoteness, but the Manipuri script is derived from Bengali, not Devanagari like Assamese and Bodo. On August 26, 1992 Manipuri was added to the list of official languages listed in Schedule VIII of the Indian Constitution, the only TibetoBurman language to have this status. Interestingly, there is a group who appear to be the descendants of Indic speakers originally settled in Manipur but now mainly in Assam, Tripura and Bangladesh, who speak an Indie language called Bishnupriya Manipuri or simply Bishnupriya. This language is not Tibeto-Burman, despite its name; for details see Sinha (1981), who suggests a population of 150,000 speakers, all outside Manipur whence they fled during invasions in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century. The language contains thousands of Manipuri loanwords, but unlike Nagamese it has a relatively complete Indie morphological system. However, in Manipur most of the people known as Bishnupriya have assimilated and now speak Manipuri.

The other large and cohesive related group is the Lushai (former name, still used to refer to this group in Myanmar (Burma) where a small number live) or Mizo (a new name coined to replace Lushai). Totalling about 400,000, like the Garo and the Naga they have been successfully converted to Christianity and use a roman script. On independence joined to India because the area was non-Moslem, the Lushai Hills portion of Assam was eventually given separate status as the Union Territory of Mizoram. Some smaller groups of this area are gradually assimilating into the Mizo; and in the last couple of years a new name, Zomi, has been coined to refer to the Mizo and the adjacent Central Chin of Myanmar who comprise a further 400,000 speakers approximately. Unlike these and other smaller related Kuki (in India) or Chin (in Myanmar) groups to their south, each of the individual Naga groups is relatively small, and traditionally was very localised. Names for these groups are very varied and confused in the literature, and include autonyms, exonyms, toponyms, and general terms such as Naga or Kaccha Naga ('bad Naga'). For a discussion, see the relevant sections of Moseley (1994) by Bradley. While there are two groups of three closely-related languages which have now been linked under one variety with a composite name (Chakhesang comprising Chokri, Kheza and southern Sangtam, and Zeliangrong including Zemi, Liangmei and Rongmei, Kabui or Pochuri), apart from these two dialect clusters the internal diversity is very great and there is little mutual intelligibility. Practising headhunting and slave raiding and living in large fortified hilltop villages, until they gradually came under British administration in the late nineteenth and twentieth century the Naga had little contact with other N aga groups requiring knowledge of each other's languages. Indeed some of the eastern Naga in Myanmar are only now coming into regular contact with outsiders. However for centuries the westernmost N aga groups had been in occasional contact with Assamese speakers in the adjacent plains areas. Much of this was raids on Assamese villages, so

Nagamese

the low hills area was largely an unpopulated no man's land; but other contact was for trade purposes, and there were some traditional relationships of nominal suzerainty between certain Naga chiefs and adjacent plains rulers; doubtless each side had a different idea which way the dominance lay. It is likely that Nagamese developed in these brief commercial contacts. Itagi et al. (1986) demonstrate a very high current tendency for 'tribals' who form the majority in all areas of Assam adjacent to the Naga to be bilingual in Assamese and to use Assamese as a lingua franca; therefore the most likely early contacts of the Nagas in this trade would have been with second language speakers of Assamese who themselves could hardly provide a standard model. While the British took Assam over in 1826, they did not have much contact with the Naga until somewhat later. At the time of the first reported contact, 1841, "this Pidgin was in vogue before the British soldiers set their feet in the Naga Hills" (Sridhar 1985: 2). However its use must have been restricted to the westernmost groups. From north to south, the westernmost Naga groups are the Tangsa, Nocte, Wancho,

759

Chang, Konyak and Phom in the Baric group, and the k, Lhota, Rengma, Angarni, Zeliangrong and Tangkhul in the Kuki-Chin-Naga group. That it was not known to most Nagas in 1873 is shown from British sources cited in Sridhar (1985: 12). Some Naga groups, notably the Nocte but probably others as well, provided workers for the tea gardens of Assam from the mid-nineteenth century; presumably the proportion of Naga who could use the pidgin was expanded in this way. Including those in Myanmar for which details are scanty, the nine Baric Northern Naga groups have a total population of nearly 400,000 of which the largest is Konyak in northern Nagaland and adjacent areas of Myanmar with about 90,000; the Kuki-Chin-Naga Southern Naga groups have over 700,000, with Ao the largest with some 110,000 and Serna and Tangkbul next with about 100,000 each. This represents a very large expansion of popUlation in the last hundred years. The following table below shows the estimated total Naga population by groups. For more details see maps and text by Bradley in Moseley (1994).

Table 1. Naga Groups in India and Myanmar Name 1. Northern (Baric) Tangsa Nocte Haimi Wancho Htangan Konyak Phom Chang Khienmungan

2. Southern (Kuki-Chin-Naga) Ao Sangtam Lhota

Other names Rangpan

Population

40,000 40,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 90,000 25,000 25,000 50,000 110,000 30,000 60,000

Locations BAP APB B APB B N N N BN

N N N

760

David Bradley

Table J. continued

Yimchunger Rengma Serna Angami Chakhesang Zeliangrong Tangkhul Maring Mao

(Chokri, Kheza, S. Sangtam) (Zemi, Liangmei, Kabui/Pochuri)

30,000 15,000 100,000 85,000 30,000 90,000 100,000 15,000 60,000

N N N N N MNA MBN M M

Location key: N =Nagaland; M =Manipur; AP =Arunachal Pradesh; B =MyanmarlBurma; A = Assam Locations cited in decreasing order of numbers of speakers

After its probable initial development in trade contacts with Assamese and Bodo, Ahom and other users of Assamese as a lingua franca in the plains, Nagamese appears to have been widely used for all kinds of contacts with outsiders by a variety of Naga groups. For example, British administrators used it; even Hutton used it to collect his massive volumes of data on various Naga groups, as it "forms the lingua franca of the Naga Hills" (Hutton 1921: 327) by the early twentieth century. This implies that it had spread in the meantime to those groups not in regular contact with the plains, presumably via other Naga groups or traders going into the hills. FiirerHaimendorf (1939) comments that it was the lingua franca of the Konyak area where he worked, in northernmost Nagaland, by the 1930s. Further north still, concerning Tirap District of Arunachal Pradesh, Choudhury (1980: 47) states "A peculiar form of Assamese is also spoken by the local people, which serves as the medium of inter-communication between the different tribes as well as between them and the plains people." Sridhar (1985: 12) summarises that "even though the exact period of the origin of Naga Pidgin is unknown, its spread to all over Nagaland is of a recent phenomenon" (sic). The structure of this pidgin differs depending on the first language of the speaker; Sridhar (1985: 19) distinguishes Southern varieties for speakers of Angarni, Zeliangrong, Serna, Mao and Chakhesang, centred in Kohima, the capital of Nagaland which was under direct British

administration since 1878; Central varieties for speakers of AD, Lhota and Yimchunger whose town centres are Mokokchung, W okha and much more remote Tuensang. Presumably he also intended to propose Northern varieties, used by speakers of Baric languages in northern Nagaland and Tirap; these northern varieties were sometimes known as Nefamese from NEFA, the acronym for North-East Frontier Agency, the name for Arunachal Pradesh before 1972. These divisions correspond fairly well to genetic subgroups within Naga, which also fit well with geographical and thus likely trade patterns. While there is no one standard variety of Nagamese, Sridhar (1985) is an attempt to create one, a compromise Ausbausprache; but there is no indication whether this will be accepted by the speakers, who have a negative view of the language as is typical in pidgin situations. Sridhar (1974) describes several varieties of Nagamese; it is a typical pidgin, with relatively simple phonology eliminating the highly marked oppositions of Assamese, limited morphology and in particular no person and number agreement on verbs (unlike every typical Indic language; the Nagamese forms correspond to third person singular forms in Assamese) and relatively noncomplex syntax. Its lexicon is mainly from Assamese, but recently it has started to relexify with some Hindi and English words as well. Hutton (1921) commented that it is easier to learn if one does not already know Assamese.

Nagamese

The only place where this pidgin is reported to have creolised is among the Bodo group of some 2,000 living in the plains area of Dimapur on the extreme southwestern edge of Nagaland. It is ironical that it is only these former speakers of another Tibeto-Burman language who have adopted Nagamese as their first language. It is also most likely to be starting to creolise among the children of mixed marriages (between parents of different Naga groups) in the larger towns of Nagaland, especially Kohima. It is most unusual for a speaker of one Naga language to learn another; the only early report of this was that after the first successful conversion of some Ao to Christianity in 1872, the Baptist mission started to use Ao with other groups as well, so the first Serna and Chang converts learned Ao for religious purposes. However, the movement to Christianity soon became indigenised and began to follow group lines, and has now reached virtually all the different Naga groups in Nagaland and to a lesser degree outside it as well. The only source of child bilingualism with more than one Naga language is in mixed marriages between Naga groups living in a traditional village, or children of parents who move to a traditional village of another group, but this is unusual. Even in such a case, the likely outcome is use of one Naga language plus Nagamese. Nagamese has stabilised for use in inter-Naga contact, which is now its main domain. Sridhar (1985:21) writes that "In the course of the last two to three decades, the functional load of Naga Pidgin has increased to such a high level that it has become an extended pidgin". He suggests a number of factors in its spread throughout Nagaland, including (in approximate temporal order) contacts with the Assam Rifles; roadbuilders; Marwari (Indian) traders who use Nagamese to communicate with a variety of Naga groups; non-Naga teachers; and medical dispensers, mainly now from Kerala. The Assam Rifles during much of the colonial period were mainly composed of Nepali speakers, for whom Assamese was also not their first language; this is also true for Malayali road workers, teachers,

761

medical workers and others from Kerala, Marwaris, and most central government workers sent to the area. English is the official state language of Nagaland. This means that it is nominally used in schools and in the State Legislative Assembly. In practice, however, Nagamese is used instead. For education thirteen languages are recognised for use in Class I to IV, but for seven of these (Chang, Phom, Yimchunger, Rengma, Sangtam, Kheza (a component of Chakhesang) and Kuki (related to southern Naga» no texts are available beyond Class II; for another four (Serna, Lhota, Konyak and Chokri (a component of Chakhesang» texts are available up to Class VI, while for Ao and Angami texts reach Class X. Teachers, whether Naga or not, tend to use Nagamese for explanations; and students use it outside the classroom. In the Legislative Assembly, much of the debates, especially Question Time, is in Nagamese; but the records are transcribed into English (Sridhar 1985: 27). Another major domain for Nagamese is in church. Where a congregation is monolingual, the local Naga language may be used; but in mixed congregations Nagamese is the sole language. Dealings with the state government are also mainly conducted in Nagamese, unless the particular official happens to be of the same Naga group as the member of the public; but again records are kept in English. A further domain, which has also resulted in the spread of Nagamese into the Naga areas of Myanmar, is the anti-Indian separatist movement. While particular groups may use their own language, the mixed nature of the insurgency means that Nagamese is essential. Lintner (1990: 75) notes that "Nagamese, the pidgin mixture of Naga dialects, Assamese and Hindi which is the lingua franca of the western tribes" (in India), is now spreading to Myanmar, where the National Socialist Council of Nagaland "recently has tried to introduce Nagamese as a lingua franca in the eastern hills also, but with limited success" (ibid: 78). The sole remaining domain of Naga language use is locally in a traditional monolingual village,

762

David Bradley

or with members of the same ethnic group when no others are present. Otherwise, and even occasionally there, Nagamese is taking over. This vast and rapid expansion of domains has led to considerable enrichment of Nagamese lexicon, but has not yet put any of the Naga languages at risk. Conversely, the beginning of creolisation among the Naga in large towns, especially Kohima, is at hand.

The most recent development of contact between peoples of Nagaland and those of Assam is an unfortunate one. The previously uninhabited low hills region on the borders, officially part of Assam, has been settled by N agas with the support of the government of Nagaland, and there has been armed conflict between Assamese and N agaland government forces in the area; an echo of the type of contact in pre-British days.

References Choudhury, S. Dutta (ed.) 1980 Tirap district. Arunachal Pradesh district gazetteers. Shillong: Government of Arunachal Pradesh. Fiirer-Haimendorf, Christoph von 1939 The naked Nagas. London: Macmillan. Hutton, J.H. 1921 The Angami Nagas, with some notes on neighboring tribes. London: Macmillan. Itagi, N.H.-B.D. Jayaram-V. Vani 1986 Communication potential in the tribal population of Assam and Madhya Pradesh. CIIL Occasional Monograph Series, 34. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages. Lintner, Bertil 1990 Land of jade. Edinburgh: Kiscadale; Bangkok: White Lotus.

Relevant map Nepali and Nagamese. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 89.

Moseley, Christopher (ed.) 1994 Atlas of the world's languages. London: Routledge. Sinha, Kali Prasad 1981 The Bishnupriya Manipuri language. Calcutta: Firma KLM. Sridhar, M.V. 1974 Naga pidgin; a sociolinguistic study of inter-lingual communication pattern in Nagaland. CIIL Occasional Monograph Series, 8. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages. 1985 Standardized grammar of Naga Pidgin. CIIL Grammar Series, 12. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.

Nepali as a lingua franca David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Nepali, an Indic language, is now a very widespread lingua franca used throughout Nepal and across the foothills of the Himalayas throughout India. It had become the first language of nearly eleven million people by 1981 and the proportion of native speakers in Nepal continues to increase; it is also the lingua franca of the Gurkha soldiers, nearly all of whom are descendants of TibetoBurman groups of northern Nepal, wherever they serve in India, Britain or elsewhere. Overall, it is likely that there are 14 to 15 million first language speakers by 1992. The spread of Nepali has been largely at the expense of a variety of TibetoBurman languages, some of which have disappeared, some of which are disappearing, and some of which are decreasing; and all of which show signs of strong Nepali influence in vocabulary. Most people in Nepal and many in the adjacent hills to the east use Nepali as a lingua franca; it has nearly nine million such secondlanguage speakers. Nepalese traders for centuries have traded into Tibet and down into India; there is therefore some limited knowledge of Nepali among those who trade with them as well. This trade spread far and wide as a result of the British Empire and the diaspora of Gurkha soldiers: to Hong Kong, the Middle East, England and elsewhere; but for this very long-range trade English was the empire's lingua franca. One interesting result of the 1950 and later treaties providing for open borders with India and of the development of air links is a substantial trade with Thailand, bringing in luxury goods which are then resold into India; but this trade is also conducted mostly in English. Nepal In its current political boundaries Nepal is a creation of the Gurkha conquest of the late 18th century. Led by Prithvi Narayan Shan, the ruler

of the small town of Gorkha (hence the name Gorkha or its more Anglicised version Gurkha), an explosive military expansion, especially to the east, led to the conquest of the Kathmandu valley, what is now eastern Nepal, and adjacent areas of what was then Sikkim and Bhutan but now forms the Darjeeling District of West Bengal in the last third of the eighteenth century; the usual date cited for this is 1768 which refers to the fall of Kathmandu, one of the Newar kingdoms in Nepal's central valley. However Clark (1957) cites the partly Nepali Rani Pokhri inscription dated 1670 and the Makhantol inscription of 1641 as evidence "that there were many Nepali speakers permanently resident there at this time, and that the two languages [Newari and Nepali] were in use concurrently, both in the court and in the city" (Clark 1957: 185, quoted in Sprigg 1987). This expansion soon led to confrontation with the British East India Company and a series of minor conflicts eventually led to the Anglo-Nepal War of 1814-1816. Having lost this war, Nepal was forced to cede the area which it had recently conquered from Sikkim and to withdraw from various conquests in the hills to the west of its current borders; from 1816 to 1857 the British ruled the Terai but returned this to Nepal because of its assistance against the 1857 Mutiny in India. Nepal has since maintained its current frontiers, but Nepali as a lingua franca continued its major eastward and to a lesser extent westward expansion ever since. The national language of Nepal is Nepali, compulsory in all official documents since 1905 and in all education throughout the country since 1957. This is an Eastern Pahari variety of Indic. The term Pahari, which is somewhat pejorative, comes from the word pahar 'hill' and thus it literally means 'hill speech'. It is written in Devanagari but the spelling is somewhat unstable

764

David Bradley

-mainly in the area of vowel length, which is absent from the language but present in the orthography. Other Pahari varieties stretch across the Himalayan foothills of northern Uttar Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh in northwestern India; no other variety of Pahari has any official status, with all other speakers using Hindi as their literary language. In fact, the early British education system in Darjeeling District used Hindi to teach its heterogeneous but largely Nepali-speaking population. The use of the name Nepal for the whole country and Nepali for its language is relatively recent; formerly Nepal referred to the Kathmandu valley, the Newar centre; and therefore Nepala Bhasa ('language of Nepal') was used to refer to Newari, a Tibeto-Burman language. This older usage is still occasionally encountered. Because of the origin of the dynasty in Gorkha, the entire country was usually known as Gorkha until 1949 when its Nepali name was officially changed to Nepal; officially the name of the national language became Nepali in 1905, but the previous name Gorkhali persisted alongside it. The large number of speakers in India (1,252,444 in the 1981 census, plus several hundred thousand in Assam) are alternatively referred to as Gorkhali or Nepali. An even older name is Khas Khura. In fact the choice of name for the language in areas to the east of Nepal has recently become controversial, with Subash Ghising and the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council preferring the term Gorkhali, while Congress-affiliated politicians such as Nar Bahadur Bhandari, Chief Minister almost continuously since 1979 in adjacent Sikkim, prefer the term Nepali. The DGHC has proclaimed the separate identity of the eastern variety of Nepali, which indeed has a large number of lexical and some morphological and phonological differences from standard Kathmandu Nepali, and wish to adopt the term Gorkhali for this variety, to separate it from the national language of Nepal, a foreign country; the Sikkim government prefers the term Nepali, while the Census of India is neutral, recording both names together. Whatever the political facts, over the last 200 years the Nepali language has had a truly

remarkable and rapid expansion. It is likely that in the mid-eighteenth century it was the local language of the lower foothills of western Nepal; whereas now it is spoken throughout the country and into adjacent areas to the east in India, and has replaced a large number of Tibeto-Burman languages as the main local speech. This process is continuing, and many of the Tibeto-Burman languages of central and eastern Nepal are disappearing, with even the largest losing speakers through the generations. The present situation is that the northern quarter of Nepal is inhabited by speakers of a very large number of Tibetan dialects who are relatively isolated, especially in winter; the higher hill areas by speakers or descendants of speakers of other Tibeto-Burman languages; most of the west of the country and the lower foothills and inhabitable valleys to the east by speakers of Nepali; and the southernmost Terai or plains region adjacent to India by speakers of A vadhi (language of the former kingdom of Oudh), Bhojpuri and Maithili. In India these three are included in eastern Hindi (though there have been some unsuccessful moves to obtain a separate official status for Maithili or Bihari, see Brass 1974) but in Nepal they have separate status. Education throughout Nepal is in the national language, Nepali, and schooling has disseminated it extremely widely. The national media are also in Nepali. English in its Indian English version is the main foreign language in education, the first international language and is also used to a much lesser degree in the media. At various times since Indian independence there has been agitation for the use of Hindi in the Terai region, vigorously resisted by the authorities in Nepal. A principal factor in the rapid spread of Nepali outside Nepal and to remote villages with local Tibeto-Burman languages has been the tradition, since 1815, of recruiting Nepalis to serve in the Gurkhas, regiments with mainly British officers (who usually learned Nepali) but all NCOs and other ranks from Nepal. Since then hundreds of thousands of Nepalese men have served with great bravery and distinction. At present there are still British-recruited Gurkhas in Hong Kong,

Nepali as a lingua franca

Brunei and Britain, though the force is now being scaled down. It was official policy to "encourage the establishment of Gurkha colonies in the neighborhood of the various Cantonments" (Morris 1936: 126); this accounts for the substantial number of Nepali speakers, predominantly males, regularly reported in the Indian census from cantonment towns throughout India. Since Indian independence India has maintained a number of Gurkha regiments; naturally these Indian regiments have Indian officers; and the sex imbalance in cantonment areas has decreased as these settlements have become permanent. Before 1950 many other forces in India recruited mainly Gurkhas; these included the Assam Rifles, the pre-independence Burma Military Police, various princely state forces such as those of Jammu/ Kashmir and Tripura, and other Indian regiments. Recruitment of Gurkhas was always mainly from the Tibeto-Burman groups of the lower hills of northern Nepal, especially the Gurung and Magar in the west and Rai and Limbu in the east, with smaller numbers from the Sunuwar and highercaste Nepali groups. These soldiers went for many years--even decades or entire careers-o serve far from their homes; when they retired most returned to their original villages and with their prestige and relative wealth served as foci for the further spread of Nepali. A substantial number of demobilised Gurkhas returned to the Darjeeling area of India where they further increased the Nepali-speaking population there; in fact some Gurkhas are from this area. Though officially few were recruited by the British outside Nepal, such 'line boys' (born in the lines, the residential area associated with a military base) are now the main source ofIndian Gurkha recruits. Educated Nepali speakers find it relatively easy to understand Hindi, but Hindi speakers tend to regard Nepali as a debased variety of Hindi. If Nepal were part of India, it is likely that Nepali would be classified as a variety of Hindi and have no official status, like the other Pahari varieties and the 'Eastern Hindi' Avadhi, Bhojpuri and Maithili varieties also spoken in Nepal. On the other hand it is clear that Nepal distinguishes these latter three within Nepal for two sensible political

765

reasons: not to have a single large group dominating the south of the country, and not to have this group called 'Hindi' and thus form a link with India. A vadhi, Bhojpuri and Maithili are spoken by much larger numbers in adjacent areas of India; there is no major cultural or linguistic gap between them and those in the Terai of Nepal, but those in Nepal use Nepali as their literary and official medium while those in India use Hindi. The Terai region was very sparsely populated prior to the 1950s due to malaria; much of the population there now has come in from India since then. As a result there is also some literacy in Hindi and extensive spoken knowledge of it in this southern portion of Nepal. There has also been occasional agitation for the use of Hindi in schools in the Terai, but the government of Nepal has vigorously rejected this. Concerning the status and use of the Tibetan varieties in Nepal see the maps and discussion relating to that language. Briefly, however, there has been substantial traditional trade between Nepal and Tibet, with seasonal caravans through various valleys in both directions, interrupted only from 1959 to the mid-1970s. Nepal for long had official representation in Lhasa (apart from periods of hostility between Tibet and Nepal such as the wars of 1788-1792 and 1854-1856) and was the only foreign country continuously represented there up to 1950, prior to the Younghusband Expedition (1903-1904) which established a British presence and the intermittent presence of a Chinese Amban (military observer) from 1723 to 1912. The Tibetans resident in northern Nepal speak a large variety of local dialects. Many of these are restricted to a single valley with a couple of villages; others, for example the Sherpa (Sharpa, 'easterners') of northeastern Nepal, are much more widespread and also live in adjacent areas of China, Sikkim and Darjeeling District. Those who are literate in Tibetan use the Written Tibetan diglossic High; traders including Nepali speakers and others from Nepal travelling into Tibet also speak some central Tibetan (Lhasa or other) spoken Low. Conversely, Tibetan traders coming in the other direction speak some Nepali. In addition, since 1959 Nepal

766

David Bradley

has received a very large number of Tibetan refugees, mainly but not exclusively from central and western Tibet. Some of these have passed through to other countries, but many remain and have established themselves solidly in Nepal. It is difficult to establish the numbers of speakers of many of the Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal because people may attribute themselves to their traditional group, which is also often their surname, despite not using or in many cases not even knowing this language. While Nepali as the national language is exclusively used in school and most official domains, it is also penetrating the home domain in the core areas of these groups through returned Gurkha soldiers and inmigrating Nepali speakers, coming from the south into the higher hills and moving to the east into less densely populated areas. Some non-Tibetan Tibeto-Burman groups, especially those of western central Nepal whose languages are relatively close to Tibetan within Tibeto-Burman such as the Gurung and smaller groups like the Ghale, Kaike, Thakali, Manang or Nyishang and others, practice Tibetan Buddhism and thus also use literary Tibetan as their liturgical language ; the degree of Tibetan influence on their everyday speech varies considerably, increasing further to the north approaching the Tibetan heartland. In Nepal the use of Tibeto-Burman languages other than Tibetan for interethnic communication is extremely limited. The most vigorous language, Newari, the traditional language of the Kathmandu valley, is still used within the ethnic group, even in some official domains; but it is inundated with Indic loanwords of various periods including modem Nepali. There are a few non-Newars who have integrated themselves into Newar society and learned Newari, but this is exceptional. Tamang traders of the region surrounding and to the east of the Kathmandu valley would have used some Newari in the past, but this is hardly the case now. Some smaller groups such as the Thakali of western central Nepal who are engaged in extensive trading relationships to the north and the south would have had a trading knowledge of Tibetan and of Nepali for many hundreds of years but continue to

use their own language for in-group purposes. All Tibeto-Burman languages apart from Tibetan are mainly confined to their traditional areas, and receding even there; some still have large numbers of speakers, but many Kiranti/Kirati/Rai languages of eastern Nepal are on the verge of extinction. For details of these languages and their current distribution, see the relevant section by Bradley of Moseley et al. (1992) and also van Driem (forthcoming). Unfortunately the very extensive linguistic survey of eastern Nepal conducted by a German team some years ago remains unpublished and almost unreported. Sprigg (1987: 2) notes that the Tibeto-Burman Kiranti kingdoms probably used Maithili, the adjacent Indic language to their south, for official puposes prior to their conquest in the late eighteenth century. The following table shows the official 1981 census data on mother tongues in Nepal; 1991 language details are not yet available, but the population had increased by 23 per cent to 18,462,081. The category 'Kira(n)ti', a traditional term for a former kingdom of the area, includes a large number of distinct languages; most people of these groups have the surname Rai, which is therefore another name for these groups. Bhote, Bhotia or Bhutia is a term for the indigenous Tibetans of northern Nepal and similarly in India. Overall about fifteen per cent of the population still claims a Tibeto-Burman mother tongue but most of these would know Nepali to some degree, in many cases very well indeed, and use it in a large variety of domains including almost all outgroup trading. The same is true for the quarter of the population whose mother tongue is one of the Indic languages other than Nepali and for the smaller Munda and Dravidian groups found m southeastern Nepal. The proportion of the population claiming Nepali as mother tongue has increased rapidly, from 48.7 per cent in the 1952/54 census to 51 per cent in the 1961 census and 52.4 per cent in the 1971 census, reaching 58.4 per cent by 1981 as seen below and certainly over sixty per cent of the 1991 total population of 18.84 million by now.

Nepali as a lingua franca

767

Table 1. 1981 Census of Nepa1: Mother Tongue

Language Nepali Maithili Bhojpuri Tharu Avadhi Rajbansi Danuwar

Speakers 8,767,361 1,668,309 1,142,805 545,685 234,343 59,383 13,522

Per eent of total 58.4 11.l 7.6 3.6 1.5 0.4 0.1

Total Indie groups

12,431,408

82.8

522,416 448,746 221,353 212,681 174,464 129,234 73,589 10,650 5,289

3.5 3.0 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.1

1,798,422

12.0

Satar Santhal

22,403 5,804

0.1

Total Munda groups

28,207

0.2

others

764,802

5.1

Total

15,022,839

100.0

Tamang Newari Rai/Kira( n)ti Magar Gurung Limbu Bhote, Sherpa Sunuwar Thakali Subtotal TB groups

Nepali outside Nepal The eastward movement of Nepali speakers includes a large proportion of descendants of Tibeto-Burman speakers who no longer use their traditional language; and this migration has progressed far outside Nepal's borders. Motivated by the prosperity of this region under British rule since the early nineteenth century and later facilitated by the freedom of movement guaranteed between India and Nepal since 1950, Nepalis have moved in to form a large majority in Darjeeling and Sikkim; others moved further east still, into Bhutan, Assam and elsewhere, concentrated in towns and low hills wherever there is available land. The concentrations in

Group Indie Indie Indie Indie Indie Indie Indie

Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Burman Ti beto-Burman

Munda Munda

mainly Tibeto-Burman

various towns of Assam and surrounding areas can be attributed to recruitment into the Assam Rifles in the first instance; these forces were started in the 1830s. Due to unrest in much of northeastern India-in large part directed against such immigrants, especially Bengalis but also Nepalis-many of these have been forced back west, even back into Nepal, over the last five or ten years. Unfortunately the unrest in Assam forced the cancellation of the 1981 census there, so the high point of this process cannot be documented from official statistics. Up to the late eighteenth century, what is now Darjeeling District west of the Tista River was part of Sikkim and east of it part of Bhutan, both

768

David Bradley

Tibetan-ruled kingdoms controlling trade routes into central Tibet; but the Gorkha invasions destabilised Sikkim and eventually part of it was taken over by the British after their victory in the Anglo-Nepal War of 1814-1816 and by a series of later cessions including that of Darjeeling itself by Sikkim in 1835 and 1850 and the Kalimpong area from Bhutan in 1865. Nevertheless a number of major Tibetan monasteries such as those at Ghoom and Kalimpong remain in the area, and numerous Tibetan-speaking Indian and British traders settled there. The hill stations of Darjeeling and Kalimpong and the tea gardens on the lower hillsides were extensively developed under British rule; Kalimpong became a key point on the route into Sikkim and Tibet from the late nineteenth century. One effect of this development was a massive influx of Nepali speakers, mainly of Tibeto-Burman background from eastern Nepal. This influx has continued uninterrupted until now, with the result that Nepali speakers have supplanted the local Lepcha, the Limbu in the west, and Tibetan varieties in the north as the dominant group. As it contained the hill stations for Calcutta, naturally Darjeeling District was attached to Bengal in the British administration, despite an almost total absence of Bengalis in the hills. After Indian independence it remained with India as a predominantly Hindu area, the northernmost part of West Bengal State and along with Jalpaiguri District to the south a part of India's narrow corridor of territory joining the Northeast with the rest of the country. Modern education was started in Darjeeling District by Scots Mission schools established by Macfarlane from 1870; these schools initially used Hindi as the medium of education, but after 1920 this was gradually replaced by Nepali. The Catholic schools continued to use Hindi for longer, in accordance with the then government policy. The 1930 Report of the Nepali text book committee recommended that Nepali become the medium of education in Darjeeling, and this eventually took place; Nepali has been the de facto language of education and administration in Darjeeling since independence, with local official

status in addition to the State language, Bengali, and the national language, Hindi. There was very extensive and violent agitation in the mid-1980s led by Subash Ghising and his Gorkhaland National Liberation Front (GNLF), which gained control of the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council (DGHC) when the central government created this in 1988 as a compromise with Ghising and the GNLF instead of a separate Gorkhaland State. Nepali in this area is now called Gorkhali by supporters of this movement. Though Lepcha is also spoken in Darjeeling District, it does not have the status which it has been given in Sikkim. Ironically the dispute between politicians in Darjeeling and Sikkim about the name for this language in India delayed its addition to Schedule VIn of the Indian Constitution until August 26, 1992 when an amendment added Nepali (or Gorkhali) as well as Konkani and Manipuri to the existing fifteen official languages of India. Sikkim was originally one of over 600 princely states; it had individual treaty relations with the British in India since 1817; but unlike Nepal whose complete independence was reaffirmed in a new treaty with Britain in 1923, and unlike Bhutan which negotiated its independence from India in 1949, Sikkim was forced to sign a less advantageous treaty and became a protectorate of India (under some duress, as in many other similar cases) in 1950. It was supposed to retain its autonomy under its Chogyal (king), but in 1975 India annexed Sikkim after unrest sponsored by Nepali-speaking Congress Party members and this traditional ruler was deposed. Since 1950 and especially since 1962 when China and India fought a short war over their borders, Sikkim was cut off from its trade with Tibet, the basis of its prosperity for centuries; it sits astride the main traditional trade route from India into Tibet. The original local language of Sikkim was Lepcha which is in decline but retains co-official status; Danjongkha, a local variety of southern central Tibetan, was the language of the rulers and part of their fellow-Tibetan population, along with other local varieties of Tibetan including Sherpa also spoken in adjacent northeastern Nepal. From

Nepali as a lingua franca

about 1875 and especially after 1889 Nepali speakers began to move in, and by 1981 they formed 62.6 per cent of the population. Naturally this majority achieved political control within what is now the Sikkim State of India after the Indian takeover in 1975. In Sikkim, as noted above, the local leaders prefer to call their speech Nepali; but it is identical to the eastern Nepali which the leaders wish to call Gorkhali in Darjeeling. The official language of Sikkim is English; four vernaculars are taught in schools. These are Nepali, Lepcha, Limbu and the Denzong variety of Tibetan which was the court language up to 1975; Tibetan lost its court status with the fall of the Chogyal. In practice, Nepali has long been the lingua franca of Sikkim, and is spoken by nearly everyone in the state. For more discussion of Bhutan see the maps and discussion of Tibetan; the extreme south of that country is mainly inhabited by Nepali speakers, whose language is called Lhotshamkha 'southern border language' by the government. The number of speakers is unknown but is probably around 250,000 or about a third of the total population; but many of these are illegal immigrants and few have full Bhutanese citizenship. The Bhutan government claims the proportion as 26 per cent; while Nepali activists claim 53 per cent (Sengupta 1991: 57). They are now required to learn the national language, Dzongkha; Nepali has very limited official use on the radio but otherwise no status, and Bhutan is making very strong efforts to maintain its

769

traditional identity-with the example of adjacent Sikkim to encourage the government. Between 1975 and 1985 Nepali was an optional additional language in schools, but the latest policy has eliminated this; schools now teach Dzongkha at all levels and at higher levels use English medium. The following tables show the data on language of the household in Sikkim and the two main Nepali-speaking districts of West Bengal from the 1981 Census of India; NepaliJGorkhali in these areas comprises nearly seventy per cent of the speakers of this language in all of India (apart from Assam, which was not included in this census). The main Schedule VIII language other than Nepali spoken in Sikkim is Hindi, with about 15,000 speakers; this is of course closely related to Nepali. In Darjeeling and adjacent Jalpaiguri Districts the number of Hindi speakers is also substantial, while the number of Bengali speakers there has also increased rapidly during British rule and since independence, especially in the plains areas of Jalpaiguri. The authorities in Bhutan have never released exact census information on languages, partly because they do not wish it to be known that such a high proportion of their population speaks Nepali. United Nations figures suggest a 26 per cent increase overall in India by 1992 over 1981, but it is unlikely that the Lepcha, Limbu or Tibetan figures have increased at this rate so the preponderance of Nepali is growing; as well, most Lepcha, Limbu and others would actually use Nepali a great deal, even if they report using their traditional language at home.

Table 2. 1981 Census ofIndia, Sikkim State, Language Mainly Spoken in the Household

Language

Speakers

Per cent

Nepali/Gorkhali

192,891

62.6

Lepcha Limbu Bhotia Sherpa Tibetan

22,391 17,922 21,548 10,726 4,149

7.4 5.8 7.0 3.5 1.3

Total Tibetan

36,423

11.8

Group Indic Tibeto-Burrnan Tibeto-Burrnan Tibetan Tibetan Tibetan

770

David Bradley

Table 2. continued

Schedule VIII

19,570

6.3

IndiclDravidian

Others

19,700

6.8

various

Total

308,262

100.0

Table 3. 1981 Census of India, Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri Districts, West Bengal State, Language Mainly Spoken in the Household

Language

Speakers Darjeeling

Jalpaiguri

Total

Per cent Drujeeling

540,444

135,860

676,304

52.8

Lepcha Limbu

3,600 87

49 5

3,649 92

0.4

Bhotia Sherpa Tibetan

2,825 879 2,269

259 62 221

3,084 941 2,490

0.3 0.1 0.2

Total Tibetan

5,973

542

6,515

0.6

266,520 125,040

1,517,424 337,353

1,783,944 462,393

26 12.2

68.5 15.2

Other

82,605

223,638

306,243

8.1

10.1

Total

1,024,269

2,214,871

3,239,140

100.0

100.0

NepalilGorkhali

Bengali Hindi

The small map on the relevant map Nepali as lingua franca shows the distribution of Nepali speakers throughout India, primarily as a result of settlements associated with the military. There is also a much smaller number of Nepali-speaking females who have been brought to Bombay, Calcutta and some other urban centres to work as prostitutes. This map can be related to the following tables which gives Nepali speakers for the northeast in 1951 and for all areas of India apart from Assam in 1981. If one projects earlier census figures for Assam forward, one would expect some 300,000 speakers, about 55 per cent

Jalpaiguri 6.1

male, for 1981. Thus the Nepali -speaking population of India falls into three groups: 1) traditional Pahari areas (northern Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh) with substantial later additions of male soldiers and ex-soldiers from Nepal; 2) areas of major eastward migration (Darjeeling, Sikkim, Assam, Bhutan, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Tripura); 3) the more distant and scattered military migrations. All of these still show an imbalance of males and females, most substantial in the most recent or distant areas.

Nepali as a lingua franca

771

Table 4. 1951 Census of India, Mother Tongue in the Northeast, NepalilGorkhali State (current)

Speakers 87,613 21,488 10,254 3,468 2,860 3,093 0

Assam (Meghalaya) (Arunachal Pradesh) (Mizoram) Manipur Tripura (Nagaland)

Per cent male

Per cent of total

56.8 58.7 61.6 85.6 66.2 57.9

66.7 16.4 12.8 2.6 2.2 2.4 0

Table 5. 1981 Census of India, Language Mainly Spoken in the Household, NepalilGorkhali StatelUnion Terr.

speakers

per cent male

West Bengal Sikkim Meghalaya Himachal Pradesh Manipur Uttar Pradesh Nagaland Maharashtra Bihar Madhya Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Orissa Mizoram Gujarat Punjab Delhi other

711,584 192,891 61,259 40,526 37,046 29,570 24,918 23,428 20,197 11,904 11,195 7,775 5,983 4,790 3,654 3,275 20,444

51.3 52.8 54.8 65.7 52.5 63.6 54.9 60 55.6 57 56 56.1 55.3 59.3 55.3 63.5 59.4

While some of these populations, such as those in Meghalaya, Assam, Nagaland and Bhutan where there have been serious problems for Nepalispeakers in the last ten years, would have decreased, it is likely that overall the Nepalispeaking population of India would have increased by nearly the average 26 per cent suggested by United Nations statistics for 1981 to 1992; if one suggests 25 per cent and assumes a base point of 300,000 speakers in Assam in 1981,

per cent 56.8 15.4 4.9 3.2 3.0 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.6

main centres of total Darjeeling, J alpaiguri, Calcutta Gangtok Shillong Simla, Kangra, Solan Imphal Dehra Dun, Nainital Kohima Bombay Singbhum, Ranchi Bhopal, Jabalpur, Durg Itanagar Sambalpur, Sundargarh Aizawl Ahmadabad, Vadodara Gurdaspur, Firozpur

the estimated total of speakers in India in 1995 is likely to be over two million including many who are the descendants of Tibeto-Burman speakers. Concerning more remote groups of Nepali speakers, the 1983 census of Burma indicates about 80,000 Nepali-born people there; but not all of these would still speak Nepali. There are also much smaller numbers in various other countries, especially in Britain, Myanmar and a variety of Commonwealth countries. In Nepal a likely

772

David Bradley

estimate of first-language speakers is over thirteen million, with another five million second-language users in Nepal as well as a substantial number in India - the balance of the population of Darjeeling and Sikkim at least, or three quarters of a million.

Thus, between first language users (15 million) and lingua franca users (nearly six million) Nepali is regularly used by over 21 million people in 1995.

References Brass, Paul R. 1974 Language, religion and politics in north India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Census of India, 1951 1951 Assam, Manipur and Tripura. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar-General. Census of India, 1981 1987 Households and household population by language mainly spoken in the household. Paper I of 1987. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar-General. Clark, T. W. 1957 "The Ra n. Pokhri inscription, Ka~hmfu).qu". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies XX: 167-187. van Driem, George forthcoming Languages of the Himalayas: an ethnolinguistic handbook. Leiden: Brill. Hutt, Michael James 1988 Nepali: a national language and its literature. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.

Relevant map Nepali and Nagamese. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 89.

National Planning Commission Secretariat 1986 Statistical pocket book Nepal 1986. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics. Morris, Maj. c.J. 1936 Handbooks for the Indian Army: Gorkhas. (second, revised edition). New Delhi: Government Printer. Moseley, Christopher (ed.) 1994 Atlas of the world's languages. London: Routledge. Nepali Text Book Committee 1930 Report of the Nepali text book committee. Typescript report to Director of Public Instruction, Bengal. Sengupta, Uttam 1991 "West Bengal influx fear: Bhutan's strife affects state", India Today 15/2/91: 56-57. Sprigg, Richard Keith 1987 "The Nepali language with reference to its relationship with the Rai, Limbu, and Lepcha languages", Indian Linguistics 48: 87-

100.

Bantawa Rai David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. In the hills of eastern Nepal there is a group of Tibeto-Burman languages known as Kiranti or Rai. For a detailed map and discussion of subgrouping, see Bradley (forthcoming). Traditional history suggests that there were Kiranti kingdoms in this area which were conquered and incorporated into the Gorkha or Nepali kingdom in the late eighteenth century. There is also said to have been a traditional Kiranti orthography; but Sprigg (1987:88) notes that the literary language of the Kiranti kingdoms was probably Maithili, an Indic language. In terms of number of current speakers, the largest group is the Limbu, who call their language Yakthung. This language has a longestablished orthography discussed in Sprigg (forthcoming), and over 200,000 speakers of a range of dialects over easternmost Nepal and portions of southwestern Sikkim State and western Datjeeling District in India. This language has official status in Sikkim where it is taught in schools up to Year XII; there are also Christian scriptures available, and a group of Limbu scholars in the Royal Nepal Academy have recently begun publishing in Limbu and about Limbu in Nepali. However, the Limbu are not usually included in the category Rai in Nepal. Geographically, they are the easternmost group

within this branch of Tibeto-Burman; for more details of Limbu population and distribution see also the text on Nepali. The second largest group numerically is the Bantawa Rai, with some 70,000 speakers. It appears to have been spreading and replacing other Rai languages for some time, and this process is reflected by dialect diversity within Bantawa. Rai languages currently being replaced by Bantawa include Lambichong or Mugali as well as Chintang. Of course all Rai languages including Bantawa are under threat from Nepali as discussed elsewhere. From the mid-nineteenth century there was substantial migration from eastern Nepal, first into Darjeeling District and later into southern Sikkim and elsewhere. Many of the new arrivals were Rai. Bantawa, being geographically central in the Rai area and spoken as a first language by about a third of the Rai, was used as a lingua franca in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by many Bantawa and non-Bantawa Rai in the tea gardens of Darjeeling District. Older people still alive today can recall this situation, but Bantawa and other Rai languages (apart from indigenous Limbu) have now ceased to be spoken outside their traditional areas in Nepal, and are gradually being replaced by Nepali even there.

References Bradley, David forthcoming "Introduction", in: D. Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas. Pacific Linguistics. van Driem, George forthcoming Languages of the Himalayas: an ethnolinguistic handbook. Leiden: Brill.

Hansson, Gerd 1991 The Rai of Eastern Nepal: ethnic and linguistic grouping findings of the Linguistic Survey of Nepal. Kathmandu: Linguistic Survey of Nepal and Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies, Tribhuvan University.

774

David Bradley

Rai, Novel Kishore n.d. A Basic Bantawa course. Kathmandu. TS. Sprigg, Richard Keith 1987 "The Nepali language with reference to its relationship with the Rai, Limbu and Lepcha languages". Indian Linguistics 48: 87100.

Relevant map Nepali and Nagamese. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 89.

forthcoming "Lepcha orthography: an earlier and a later stage", in D. Bradley (ed.), TibetoBurman languages of the Himalayas. Pacific Linguistics.

Empires and Hngue franche in premodern South-East Asia David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. The standard account of the early history of mainland South-East Asia suggests the use of three main languages as court languages and lingue franche at earlier periods, and of Sanskrit as the literary and liturgical language at each of these courts. Coedes (1948) summarises the South Asian origins of the cosmology of kingship, the use of Sanskrit as official language, adoption of Indian mythology such as the Ramayana, and the law of Manu; but it appears that there was no large migration of people from India at the time. The three languages were the predecessors of modern Khmer, Mon and Cham. All were inundated with Sanskrit loanwords and used Indic-derived scripts; these were transmitted to their successors, the Burmese and Thai. The Khmer were the basis of the most persistent and extensive of the three empires, which has survived in truncated form to the present as Kampuchea. The earliest known South Asian style Khmer kingdom in this area is usually known as Funan, from the modern Chinese pronunciation of its kings' title bnam, modern Khmer phnom 'mountain'. This is known from inscriptions and contact with Chinese sea-borne traders from about 200 AD, included what is now southern Vietnam and southern Kampuchea and had its capital at Vyadhapura. It was conquered and gradualy absorbed by a tributary Khmer kingdom to its north, Chenla, between 550 and 627 AD. Chenla was based in what is now northeastern Kampuchea and southern Laos, but when its dynasty took over Funan it expanded to the south and southeast. Chenla was allied with the Cham kingdom, Champa, to its northeast. The Chenla Khmers, after various dynastic mishaps, flourished as a united kingdom from 802, the starting date of the dynastic era of Jayavarman II who established various capitals

including Angkor. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries the Khmer Empire at its apogee conquered the Dvaravati Mon kingdom of what is now central Thailand to the west, as well as the Champa kingdom of what is now central Vietnam to the northeast, and thus included what is now central and northeastern Thailand, southern Laos and southern Vietnam as well as Kampuchea. This was followed by a long period of decline, during which Angkor was sacked several times by the Thais and eventually abandoned in the midfifteenth century in favour of Phnom Penh, the current capital. The territory to the north and west was lost to the Thais, who even sacked Phnom Penh in 1594; that to the east was infiltrated and eventually taken by the Viet in their southward movement. Had it not been for French colonial ambitions in the late nineteenth century, what is now Kampuchea might have been divided between Thailand and Vietnam; but the last remnants of the Khmer dynasty were recognised and supported by the French from 1863, and Kampuchea achieved independence again after World War II. Khmer was earlier the dominant language of a much wider area than present-day Kampuchea; it remains a very significant language of the areas of Thailand adjacent to Kampuchea, especially in the northeastern provinces of Buriram, Surin, Sisaket and Ubon. Large numbers of Khmer captives were moved into eastern central Thailand in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century, but these have now assimilated and become Thai. Khmer is also a substantial minority language in the Mekhong delta region of southern Vietnam. Standard Khmer, with its long literary history, has diverged greatly in pronunciation from the written language; but many of the local varieties, such as those spoken in northeastern Thailand, are more conservative. Khmer has both served as a

776

David Bradley

vehicle for the transmISSIOn of Theravada Buddhism, SanskritlPali vocabulary and an Indic script to the Thai, and also itself provided a very substantial quantity of lexical material for High vocabulary in modern Thai. This suggests an earlier period of contact in which the Thai elite learned from the Khmer and presumably also used Khmer as a lingua franca. It is clear that Khmer was the lingua franca of the southeastern corner of mainland South-East Asia for a millenium or more; this is reflected in the large influx of Khmer words into related Mon-Khmer languages of the area, especially the Pearic groups who are the vestigial non-Khmer population scattered around western, southern and northern Kampuchea. Khmer now has over ten million speakers, including nearly a million in Thailand and a million in southern Vietnam, and is the national language of Kampuchea where it is used for all official purposes. The balance of the population of Kampuchea now consists of small overseas Chinese and Vietnamese groups, and speakers of closely-related Mon-Khmer languages, all of whom use Khmer as a second language, many bilingually. Much of the formerly Mon or Khmer population of adjacent areas of Thailand has been assimilated and now regard themselves as Thai. To the northeast of the Khmer, another early kingdom was led by the Cham, speakers of an Austronesian language of which various descendant languages survive in the hills of southern Vietnam. This kingdom was based on the central coast of Vietnam. The Chinese knew it as Linyi from about 200 AD, but it is better known as Champa. Sacked several times by China during the Chinese rule over northern Vietnam up to 939 AD, it was tributary to China but Chinese control was nominal at best. The newly-independent Viet soon started their movement to the south, seizing Champa's northern provinces. The capital fell to the Viet in 1044 and 1069, but new Cham dynasties re-established themselves. Khmer pressure from the west also began, with the capital falling to the Khmer in 1145; Champa sacked Angkor in 1177, but again the Champa capital fell to the Khmer in 1190 who effectively controlled the Chams until 1220. After indepen-

dence was regained, hostilities with the Viet continued for 'several centuries, and the final conquest by the Viet eventually took place in 1471. A southern offshoot of Champa, converted to Islam, survived to 1720 when it was conquered by the Viet, but most of its population fled to northeastern Kampuchea. This branch of the Cham was greatly reduced in number by the Khmer Rouge after 1975, and a few refugees are now in Malaysia; but there are still some 600,000 people speaking Chamic languages in the interior of southern Vietnam, including the Rhade, Jarai, Haroi, Chru, Roglai and Cham. In addition there is a small Chamic colony with several thousand remaining so-called 'Huihui' speakers (thus known because they are Moslem; the Hui nationality in China is the Chinese Moslems) on southern Hainan Island in China. While Cham must have been a significant lingua franca in Champa, there is little vestige of this now. The third premodern kingdom whose influence survives to the present was dominated by the Mon, speakers of another Mon-Khmer language in what is now central Thailand. The Dvaravati kingdom, the earliest records of which date from about 550 AD, had its first capital at Nakon Path om; by the eighth century the focus shifted to Lavo (modern Lopburi), with later offshoots to the north at Haripunjaya (modern Lamphun) and to the west at Thaton (in modem Myanmar). At their peak, Mon kingdoms controlled what is now central and northern Thailand and southern Myanmar; they were in competition with the Khmer to their east and the Burmans and Thai to their north. The western Mon kingdom at Thaton fell to the Burmese about 1050; but the Burmese fell under the cultural sway of the Mon, adopting their script, their Theravada Buddhism, and assimiliating much of their population over the centuries. There were various Mon political resurgences, and the Mon language remained vigorous in what is now the Mon State of southeastern Myanmar; according to the 1983 census, there were 826,801 Mon, of whom 642,185 in the Mon State, 112,137 in the Karen State to the east, 23,430 in Tennasserim to the southeast, 25,575 in Rangoon

Empires and lingue tranche in premodern South-East Asia

and 15,308 in Pegu; all traditional Mon territories. However quite a large number of these ethnic Mon do not speak Mon; there may be as few as 600,000 speakers in Myanmar. The central Mon area of Dvaravati was conquered by the Khmer at the peak of their expansion, and later reconquered by the Thai under Ramkhamhaeng the Great in the 1280s. The northern Mon kingdom of Haripunjaya fell to the Thai of Chiangrai in the 1290s who then established Chiangmai a short distance to the north. Mon influence on the Thai was minimal, as they fell within the cultural orbit of the Khmer instead. However there is a small vestige of the Dvaravati Mon population in the hills between northeastern and central Thailand; they speak a language which they call Nyahkur; the Thai call them Chao Bon ('upper people') from their hilly location. The rest of the population of Dvaravati and Haripunjaya assimilated and became Thai over the next few centuries. There is now a small Mon population in central Thailand, but this consists entirely of Mon who fled from Burma in the nineteenth century. The Thai kings employed them as soldiers, placing

777

them at various strategic points along rivers in central and western Thailand: south and north of Bangkok, around Kanchanaburi on the traditional invasion route form Burma, and elsewhere. These Mon are also in the process of assimilating into the Thai popUlation, but perhaps as many as 100,000 still speak Mon to some degree, and most still recall their Mon ancestry even if they do not speak Mon. It is ironical that Mon spoken in the traditional Mon territory of Dvaravati should have been reintroduced from Burma after a lapse of many centuries. In summary, the great empires of mainland South-East Asia have left substantial vestiges: over ten million Khmer speakers plus extensive influence on modern Thai and various MonKhmer languages; about 700,000 Mon speakers whose ancestors had a profound influence in the development of the Burmans; and some 600,000 Chamic speakers in southern Vietnam. All three languages were doubtless used as lingue franc he in their respective domains, and the Khmer and Mon transmitted the Sanskrit/Hindu and Palil Buddhist heritage to their successors, the Thai and Burmese.

References Bauer, Christian 1990 "Language and ethnicity: the Mon in Burma and Thailand", in: G. Wijeyewardene (ed.), Ethnic groups across national boundaries in mainland Southeast Asia, 14-

Relevant map Ancient kingdoms of South-East Asia. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 85.

47. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Coedes, Georges 1948 Les hats hindouises d'/ndochine et d'/ndonesie. Paris: de Boccard.

Southwestern Dai as a lingua franca David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Dai was this group's original autonym; regular sound changes result in it being pronounced Tai or Thai as well. The Dai family is widespread in southwestern China and has spread into mainland South-East Asia in the last millenium or so, moving southwest in response to the expansion of the Chinese. On historical linguistic criteria it is divided into Northern, Central and Southwestern branches, also grouped rather closely with the Kam-Sui languages in China to its northeast and less closely with various so-called Kadai languages of the same area and northern Vietnam. The total number of Kam-Thai first language speakers is now approaching 90 million. In the Kam-Sui (or as it is known in China, Dong-Shui) branch there are some 3.5 million speakers of KamlDong, Sui/Shui, MularnlMulao, Maonaml Maonan, Mak/Mo and TenlYanghuang (in each case the first name is the usual one in the linguistic literature, the second is the one used in China). Northern Dai has about 14 million speakers including all of the Buyi and the northern two thirds of the Zhuang nationality in China, the Ong-Be or Lingao of Hainan Island and some groups scattered to the south such as the Yay in Vietnam and the Saek in Laos and Thailand. Central Dai has over seven million, with about a third of the Zhuang nationality of China as well as the Tay and Nung nationalities of northern Vietnam. Southwestern Dai is the branch that has moved southwest; it would originally have been the western subgroup. It is by far the largest in terms of current numbers of speakers-largely as a result of being the lingua franca which eventually replaced a variety of indigenous languages in the areas conquered by the Southwestern Dai; see the separate map and discussion of premodern South-East Asia. Apart from over 65 million current first language

speakers, as the national languages of Thailand (Thai), Laos (Lao), the official language of the Shan State in Myanmar (Shan) and a group of lingue franche in western Yunnan in China, it is in current regular use by at least 10 million secondlanguage speakers. It was presumably also the lingua franca during the Ahom rule in northeastern India from the early thirteenth century, but Southwestern Dai has not persisted there. The standard Thai history in Thailand claims a connection with the Nanchao kingdom of northwestern Yunnan, which flourished from about 650 to 902 AD and was centred on the town of Dali. However this is incorrect, as that kingdom obviously had Tibeto-Burman and probably Burmese-Lolo rulers (Backus 1981). The Dai origins are far to the east of this area, probably in what is now eastern Yunnan, western Guangxi and southern Guizhou Provinces of China. They are a valley people and their spread is along rivers whose banks can be used for irrigated rice fields. The various Southwestern Dai of Yunnan are grouped into the Dai nationality; they include seven or more subgroups: the Yongren Dai of the extreme north of Yunnan and into southern Sichuan; the Tai Neua (,northern ') of west central Yunnan; the Tai Mao or Dehong Dai of the Dehong Prefecture in extreme western Yunnan; the Tai Yai or Shan of southwestern Yunnan; the Tai Ly or Xishuangbanna Dai of the Xishuangbannan Prefecture in extreme southwestern Yunnan; the Tai Pong of the rivers of south central Yunnan; and the Tai Khaw or White Tai of extreme southern Yunnan, along the rivers approaching Vietnam. Of these, Tai Mao, Shan, Tai Ly and Tai Khaw are each used as a local lingua franca by the inhabitants of adjacent hills when they come to trade in the valley markets operated by the Dai. All four of these are also

780

David Bradley

spoken as first vaneties and used as lingue franche by others in adjacent countries: Tai Mao in the northern Shan State of Myanmar where it is known as Shan Tayok or 'Chinese Shan'; Shan or Tai Yai in most of the rest of the Shan State; Tai Ly in northwestern Laos; and Tai Khaw in northwestern Vietnam. Other Southwestern Dai lingue franche in Myanmar include Khamti ('gold place') Shan, used in the extreme northwest of the country and also in India; and Khyn, the local variety of Dai spoken at Kengtung in the southeastern Shan State. The Burmese name Shan is derived from an alternative autonym also seen in Siam, the former name of Thailand. Along the rivers in northwestern Vietnam Tai Khaw and another local variety, Tai Dam ('black Tai') are used in markets. In Laos, apart from the extreme northwest where Tai Ly and Kham Myang are in

use and the extreme northeast where Tai Dam and Tai Khaw are found, different local varieties of Lao, the national language, are used. Thailand, as noted, has Northern Thai or Kham Myang ('town language') as a lingua franca in the North, with various local subvarieties; this is used by the various Tibeto-Burman, Miao-Yao and Mon-Khmer groups there. Lao, often called Northeastern Thai or Isan, is the local speech in the Northeast and lingua franca used by various Khmer, other Mon-Khmer and other Dai groups in the area. Southern Thai or Pak Tai (' southern') is used as a second language and lingua franca by several million speakers of Malay in the South. In addition, the substantial non-Thai migrant population, especially overseas Chinese, also uses the local variety as a lingua franca; their descendants are first-language speakers of these local varieties of Thai.

Table 1. Southwestern Dai populations Country

Official enumeration

Date

1995 estimate

Names

China Myanmar India Vietnam Thailand Laos Malaysia

1,025,128 2,890,437

1990 1983

1.1 million 3.7 million 20,000 850,000 57 million 2.3 million 30,000

Dai Shan Khamti, Phake, Aiton Thai Thai Lao Thai

850,000 1,804,101

1994 est. 1985

The use of Thai throughout Thailand is relatively recent; until the last hundred years or so, local administrations in each region used a traditional local variety: Pak Tai in the South, Kham Myang in the North, and Lao in the Northeast. Of the approximately 62 million people in Thailand, about a third speak Central Thai as their first dialect; another third speak a northeastern variety, closely related to Lao; about ten per cent speak Pak Tai or Southern Thai; and nearly ten per cent speak Kham Myang or Northern Thai. In the Northeast several million of the Lao speakers are

of Khmer descent, and some still speak Khmer as their home language, while others speak other Mon-Khmer or Dai varieties at home. In the North of Thailand over half a million people speak a hill tribe language, Tibeto-Burman, Mon-Khmer or Miao-Yao, as their first language, with Kham Myang as a local lingua franca and Central Thai as the language of (often rather limited) education. In the South, several million people speak Malay as their first language, some of whom are bilingual in Pak Tai and others of whom learn it only in school and for official purposes. As a result there

Southwestern Dai as a lingua franca

is a fascinating pattern of variation between standard Central Thai and regional varieties, and changing distribution of domains of use in which Central Thai is spreading from elite groups and towns outwards. As the discussion of premodern empires in South-East Asia indicates, many of the current Thai population are descendants of Mon, Khmer or other language speakers. This tendency to assimilate other populations has been a feature of Thai history, as it was for many previous states in the region. It is reflected in the greater racial diversity and often darker complexion of the Northeastern, Central and Southern Thai population as opposed to the Thai of the North. What was valuable in the premodern period was people living under the direct control of a state and paying taxes or providing services to that state. Therefore, rather than conquering and holding territory, invasions often led instead to massive deportation of conquered populations to areas closer to the centre of the state. This is why Thailand is dotted with isolated small settlements of Dai and other groups from far away; for example the Tai Dam ('black Tai') or Lao Song from northeastern Laos and northwestern Vietnam, who are found in substantial agglomerations in western central and southern Thailand. Some of these groups persist in their original ethnic identity but of course become bilingual in the local variety of Thai and learn Central Thai in school; others simply become Thai, losing any vestige of the earlier identity. These deportations continued into the late nineteenth century; and the

References Backus, Charles 1981 The Nan-chao kingdom and Tang China's southwestern frontier. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Relevant map Southwestern Dai Languages. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 86.

781

Thais were also happy to welcome overseas Chinese and other migrants over the centuries. Most of these Southwestern Dai lingue franc he and some other former lingue franc he were widely used in a dominant Buddhist valley culture and became the vehicle of a separate written tradition using an Indic-derived orthography. The westernmost of these groups, including the Khamti, Tai Mao, and Tai Yai, derived their Lik Tai script ultimately from Burmese. A somewhat distinct tradition of scripts was used by the Tai Ly, Khyn of Kengtung and the Kham Myang, related to those used by the Lao, Tai Dam and Tai Khaw. Finally, the Thai script derived from Khmer is a third strand. Of these, a revised version of Lik Tai is used for Shan in Myanmar, and a separately revised version for Tai Mao (Dehong Dai) in China. The Tai Ly script has also been revised for use in China as Xishuangbanna Dai. Lao script is used in Laos, and Thai script in Thailand; Lao, Kham Myang and other scripts are gradually disappearing from use in Thailand, and Khamti, Khyn, Black Tai and others are gradually going out of use. In summary, Southwestern Dai has expanded through migration and political control over a very large area including Thailand, Laos, northern Myanmar as well as southwestern Yunnan and northern Vietnam. These groups have assimilated local populations, reaching a current number of first-language speakers exceeding 65 million, with ten million or more others using one or other of them, especially Thai, Lao or Shan, as a second language or lingua franca.

Vietnamese David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Vietnamese, the national language of Vietnam, has nearly 70 million first language speakers (including some bilingual in a variety of Chinese or another local language) and about five million second language speakers. As the national language it has become the lingua franca for all purposes within Vietnam, and has also seen wide use in Laos and Kampuchea for the last hundred years. It is also the language of the Jing nationality in China and of a major refugee population scattered throughout Southeast Asia and various Western countries. The influx of Vietnamese as a lingua franca into Laos and Kampuchea started during the French colonial period when the French used French-educated Vietnamese speakers in their colonial administration throughout Indochina, and many traders and shopkeepers followed. This continued, especially in the eastern parts of those countries, from the 1960s to 1975 during the war in South Vietnam; the Communist insurgencies of Laos and Kampuchea relied heavily on Vietnamese support and many of their leaders spoke Vietnamese and spent substantial periods of time in North Vietnam; but after 1975 the new governments began to assert their separateness from Vietnam and so the use of Vietnamese there has declined. The United Nations estimate for 1995 population in Vietnam is 74.5 million; of these about eight per cent are members of national minorities who learn Vietnamese in schools, speak it as a lingua franca, and use it for all official purposes. The 1990 population of the Jing (Vietnamese) nationality in China, which is concentrated just to the northeast of the border with Vietnam along the coast, was 18,915. Substantial populations of refugees fleeing Communist takeover have existed since 1954,

when the North became Communist. At that time many Vietnamese went to other French-controlled territories including France, New Caledonia and elsewhere; also a large group fled overland through Laos into Thailand where they remain in the Northeast as a cohesive group. A truly massive population movement, which is still continuing, was triggered by the Communist takeover of the South in 1975; some remain in camps in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Hong Kong, while many more have been resettled to the United States, Australia, Canada, France and other Western countries. This refugee population of several million has spread the use of Vietnamese very widely throughout the Western world. Though it is difficult to be certain, it is likely that about half of the post-1975 refugees from Vietnam are overseas Chinese. Hundreds of thousands of them returned overland or in boats to China, and they also form a major part, in some countries as much as half, of the 'Vietnamese' refugees accepted for resettlement. On arrival many of these people choose to identify themselves as Chinese and operate mainly within the overseas Chinese community, but others retain their links to the Vietnamese community and continue to use Vietnamese. Vietnamese shows strong evidence in the form of lexicon and syntax of its millenium of control by China up to 939 AD. Long after this, Vietnamese continued to be written with Chinese and Sino-Vietnamese characters called Chu. Nom, as Japanese continued to use Kanji and Korean used Chinese and Sino-Korean characters; though independent, these countries were still within the cultural orbit of China. It was only in the seventeenth century that a romanisation for Vietnamese was developed by Jesuit missionaries;

784

David Bradley

and this did not officially replace Chii Nom until 1910; even after that, in the royal courts and among traditional scholars Chii Nom characters continued in use for some time; but few people can use them now. Vietnamese history over the millenium since independence from China has been a long southward movement. The Vietnamese heartland was the north; while many of the Vietnamese speakers in central and southern Vietnam are the descendants of migrants from the north, many others would be descendants of speakers of other

References Rado, Marta-Lois Foster-David Bradley 1986 English language needs of migrant and refugee youth. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Relevant map The Yi and Viet languages. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 88.

languages; especially formerly Austronesian speaking Chamic groups after the fall of the Cham empire, Champa, in the fifteenth century and also various speakers of Mon-Khmer languages. Later, in the extreme south the Vietnamese came up against the Khmer empire, and many Khmers remains scattered in the Mekhong delta region of Vietnam as a vestige of this earlier settlement. On the other hand Vietnamese villagers moved westward into eastern Kampuchea during the French period, leading to conflicts over land which continue now.

Yunnanese Chinese David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. There are overseas Chinese throughout mainland Southeast Asia; they arrived in the main in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by sea from the coastal provinces inhabited by speakers of Cantonese, Min and Hakka varieties of Chinese. As a result of the tendency to chain migrationwhere successful Chinese sponsored relatives and others from their original area-most locations are dominated by one group. In Thailand this is mostly Teochiu (Chaozhou), speakers of a variety of Southern Min; in Vietnam the main group is Cantonese; in many towns in peninsular Malaysia it is Hokkien, Southern Min like Teochiu, but in others it is Cantonese; Hakka preponderates in some places in east Malaysia and Indonesia; and so on. For preliminary details see the maps in Wurm-Hattori 198111983 and Wurm, T'sou and Bradley 1987/1991. Full information on the distribution of overseas Chinese is the subject of a substantial future study, and is not discussed here. One interesting and little-documented group of Chinese in mainland Southeast Asia is not an overseas group but an overland group. The first stages of this movement were in the mid-nineteenth century, largely led by Chinese Moslem traders from Yunnan. These movements were partly triggered by the spread of opium production into southwestern China, and partly by various small-scale wars between local warlords and different Chinese Moslem groups-the Black Flags and others. One name for these traders is Panthay; another, more recent, is Haw which now refers to Yunnanese Chinese in general, not just Moslems; the origin of this term is obscure but it may be from the word for Chinese in a hill tribe language of the area. It is documented that the Moslems were in northern Laos at the time of French takeover in the

mid-1880s, and in northeastern Burma when the British entered in the late 1880s. These communities continue to exist; in some areas such as the Kokang region of the northeastern Shan State in Myanmar the Yunnanese Chinese are the dominant local group in the valleys, with various others such as the Wa in the hills. As a result of this spread, Yunnanese, which of course is a Southwestern Mandarin variety, spread widely among Chinese traders, their local spouses and descendants in these areas adjacent to China. Trade continued in both directions under European colonial administration in Indochina and Burma, and into Thailand, and the peaceful conditions in these areas motivated more traders and settlers to come in from China. The development of the opium trade in the Golden Triangle comprising the eastern Shan State of Myanmar, northwestern Laos and the hilly parts of northern Thailand involved extensive contact with Yunnanese Chinese middlemen; in many opium-producing villages there is now at least one Chinese man with a local wife running a small shop, extending credit and buying the cash crops including opium. These men and their associated co-traders in the valleys also naturally speak some local Dai language, the valley lingua franca, and some Lahu, the lingua franca of this hill area, as well as the local language of the village. Other itinerant peddlars also use these various lingue franche. After the defeat of the Nationalist Chinese by the Communists, a number of Nationalist armies, bandits and normal villagers fled from Yunnan into the Shan State of Myanmar in 1950. The soldiers made occasional raids into China but later supported themselves mainly by taking over the transport of the opium crop. They are often called KMT, from the initials of Kuomintang

786

David Bradley

(Guomindang), the Nationalist Chinese political party. Many of these Chinese soldiers married local girls, especially Shan, Lue, Lisu and Lahu, and the armies recruited local men including many Lahu, Lisu and Wa to replenish their ranks. The main lingua franca of these military units remains Yunnanese Chinese, with Lahu and and Shan also used with local people. These armies were supposed to leave Myanmar in the mid-1950s according to a UN-brokered agreement; and indeed many were airlifted to Taiwan, including a small number of the local non-Chinese soldiers recruited after 1950. Those who remained in the area moved south to the Thai border and continued their close association with the Lahu, Lisu and other groups; indeed many Lisu villages in Thailand consist mainly of the descendants of mixed marriages with these Chinese. These Lisu are called Chinese-Lisu by the Lahu and Akha of the area, and their Lisu is inundated with Chinese loanwords; see Hope forthcoming. The remnants of these armies on the borders of Thailand have extended their activities vertically by processing opium into heroin and transporting and marketing it further towards the consumers; this continues up to the present, though some of these Chinese have attempted to lend respectability to their drug operations by transmogrifying themselves into pseudo-Shan separatist move-

ments, by linking up with the Burmese as local militia, or by working for the CIA in various operations in Myanmar, China and Laos, or all of the above simultaneously or seriatim. Exact population figures are vey difficult to collect, but there are several hundred thousand Yunnanese Chinese scattered in the towns and valleys of northeastern Myanmar, northern Laos and northern Thailand, and many more individuals living in villages of other groups as traders. The 1983 census of Burma shows over 110,000 Chinese in the Shan State, and most of these would be Yunnanese Chinese; many more in remoter areas would not have been counted. There are some Chinese villages in Kokang in northeastern Shan State, Myanmar, also northern Phongsaly Province in Laos, and northern Chiangrai and Chiangmai Provinces in Thailand. The few separate Yunnanese Chinese villages in Thailand are ethnically mixed, with wives from a variety of local backgrounds; Mote (1967) describes two of them and suggests a population of 6,700 in such villages in the mid-1960s. As a result of mixed marriages with local women many are bilingual in Chinese and one or more local languages; and many thousands of local people, mainly hill tribes, have learned to speak Yunnanese Chinese as a lingua franca in the KMT armies or the opium trade in general.

References Hope Edward R. forthcoming Lisu -English dictionary (southen dialect). Edited by David Bradley. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

Relevant map Burmese and Yunnanese Chinese. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 87.

Mote, F.W. 1967 "The rural 'Haw' (Yunnanese Chinese) of Northern Thailand", in: Peter Kunstadter (ed.), Southeast Asian tribes, minorities and nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, vol. II: 487-524.

Indian Subcontinent

Languages of interethnic communication on the Indian Subcontinent (excluding Nepal) Bertil Tikkanen Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction

The Indian subcontinent (South Asia) comprises the following states: India, Pakistan, Nepal (not included in the map), Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives.1 The relevant maps give the (approximate) location of a little more than 170 languages and some 20 lingue franche . (With some exceptions these are languages with more than 5000 speakers.) The languages belong to 6 different families : Indo-European (Indo-Aryan [0] and Iranian [Ir.] branches), Dravidian (Dr.), AustroAsiatic (Munda [Mu.] and Mon-Khmer [M-Kh] branches), Sino-Tibetan (Tibeto-Burman [TB] branch), Kam-Tai or Tai-Kadai, and Andamanese. In addition there are one or two isolates or unclassified languages (Burushaski, Nahalil Nihali). The languages families are indicated by different colours on the maps. The languages are indicated according to areas of their main concentration or extension, outside which areas they may appear scattered or interspersed over considerable distances, thus especally Sindhi, Nepali and Konkani and some tribal languages, e.g. Gondi, Kurukh, Santali, and Mundari. Partial regional overlap of adjacent languages is mostly to be understood even without specific indication (as by brackets). At least two languages have no particular "homeland" any more, viz Urdu (biggest concentration now in Karachi) and the partly nomadic dialects of RAJASTHANI (Banjari, LambadilLamani, Guj(a)ril Gujuri/Gojri, etc.) interspersed over vast territories in the northwestern and southern parts of the subcontinent. In most cases it has not been feasible to depict this kind of scattered or unstable distribution in a satisfactory manner. Such

scattered minontIes are, of course, highly bilingual in the surrounding language(s). The naming and delimitation of languages and dialects is conventional and not always very clear nor unambiguous (some languages are known by different names, and sometimes the same name refers to different languages). The Indo-Aryan languages or macro languages of the plains merge into each other, being on the local level made up of enormous dialect continua (e.g. PANJABIHINDI-BIHARI-RAJ ASTHANI-PAHARI). These fluid 'macrolanguages' (indicated by capital letters, e.g. HINDI) may have "dialects" which are mutually unintelligible and hard to classify . There is normally full intelligibility between adjacent dialects/languages of such macro-languages on the local level, so boundaries have not always been indicated for such dialects or languages. It is to be understood that on the subregional levels subregional or regional lingua franca forms of these languages are used for interethnic communication. Taking into consideration the enormous dialectal diversification and number of small minority languages, the Indian subcontinent is an area of great linguistic diversity . The sum total of distinct mother tongues in India alone is somewhere around 1,300 (200- 300 distinct languages) and the number of ethnic communities is three times as many (cf. Annamalai 1994: 1651b). This implies that most languages are multiethnic. Yet not a few tribes are heterolingual. The total population of South Asia exceeds now 1,200 million (India 950, Pakistan 140, Bangladesh 115, Sri Lanka and Nepal 15 each) . The tribal population constitutes a little less than 10% of the whole population. The total tribal population in India was 51.6 mill. in 1981 (7 .8% of the whole

788

Berti! Tikkanen

population). It consisted of 613 tribal communities (1978), having 304 tribal mother tongues, reduced to 101 distinct identifiable languages (belonging to all South Asian language families). Some tribes have non-tribal mother tongues and many tribes are heterolingual. For instance, the 22 tribes in Assam had 60 mother tongues grouped into 40 languages, and the 58 tribes in Madhya Pradesh had 93 mother tongues grouped into only 38 languages (Annamalai 1990: 26-27; 1994: 1651-1652). Especially in mountainous, hilly and/or forested regions (northwest, northeast, central) the linguistic density is extremely high, elsewhere it is rather low (because of the high population density). The overwhelming majority of all South Asian languages have less than 100,000 speakers. The population of nearly half of the total number of districts in India is exposed to heterogeneous surroundings where minority speech groups exceed 20% of the total population (Khubchandani 1978: 571). The presence of distinct sociolects or caste languages and diglossia in several regions increases linguistic diversity in a manner which cannot be represented on the maps. There are numerous villages, e.g., in the Deccan, where 2-4 or even 5 quite different languages are spoken by different, more or less multilingual social or ethnic groups. Bilingualism (taken to include multilingualism) is fairly stable in South Asia and is in inverse proportion to the relative size of the mother tongue (Weinreich 1957: 21lf.). The official average rate of bilingualism in India was 13% in 1981 (16% for tribals and 42% for linguistic minorities in general). These numbers would be higher if it were considered that, e.g. a fair proportion of the largely bilingual inhabitants of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh report themselves to be monolingual speakers of Hindi (Khubchandani 1978: 565). Bilingualism is most common between dialects, though this bilingualism is mostly passive and not necessarily complete (cf. the dialect continua of HINDI, RAJASTHANI and BIHARI, which all merge into each other). Bilingualism is lowest among the N aga tribes, and it is less than

average also for some other northeastern tribal language, such as Khasi (M-Kh), Kabui (TB) and Hmar (TB). Disregarding passive bilingualism! understanding between speakers of adjacent dialects, bilingualism is most common in the national or official languages. These are also the major lingue franche. The 15 constitutional official (scheduled) languages of India are: Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada (Dr.), Kashmiri, Malayalam (Dr.), Marathi, Panjabi, Oriya, Sanskrit, Sindhi, Tamil (Dr.), Telugu (Dr.), and Urdu. With the exception of Kashmiri, Sindhi and Sanskrit, these are regional official languages, used in administration and as primary media of education. In addition some other official regional languages have been recognized in more recent times, e.g. Konkani, Manipuri/Meithei, Nepali/ Gorkhali, Bhotia, Tulu, etc. Furthermore there are approximately 50 minor non-constitutional written languages, mostly also used in education. English is also an official language of the Indian Union and all Indian states/union territories. 2 The 1981 census reports that almost 96% of the whole population of India speak some of the (then 18) scheduled languages. In 1971 this figure was only 90%. These figures, which are based on personal returns, are misleading, because there is an increasing tendency to name one's mother tongue in accordance with the prestigious constitutional languages (used as written media). Also it should be calculated that even 5% of India's present population (> 900 million) is at least 45 million. Percentages can disguise many facts regarding the importance of mother tongues: Santali, a tribal language twice the size of Sindhi (and the same size as a smaller European language, e.g. Finnish), constitutes just a little over 0.5% of the whole population with its 4.2 (now 6) million speakers. In Pakistan, Urdu is the only recognized national language, but especially Sindhi, Siraiki, Panjabi and Pashto are also gaining in regional official recognition. In Bangladesh Bengali (99%) is the state language. Sri Lanka recognizes now both Sinhalese and Tamil as official languages. In Bhutan, with its dozen languages, the national

Indian Subcontinent: interethnic communication languages

language is Dzongkha/Lhoke. In all these countries English, too, is an official language. 2. Main lingue franche and contact languages in interethnic communication The largest lingua franca 3 (or link language) in South Asia is English, which is one of the official languages of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Bhutan. As a mother tongue it is negligible in all these countries (India: 233.000; Sri Lanka 100.000). According to the official statistics, bilingualism is common in English in India (one quarter of all bilinguals in India had English as their second language). Knowledge of English is chiefly acquired in middle and secondary school (in Bhutan and Bangladesh English is commonly used also in primary education). Literacy in South Asia is low (1080%, with an average at 30-40%). This tends to limit the lingua franca use of English to the educated, mainly urban elite. It should also be stressed that the mere knowledge of (some) English does not say anything about the degree and sphere of the use of English as a lingua franca.

Unless a region or location under discussion has any other stated lingua franca, it is to be understood that English is the chief lingua franca of the region in question (e.g. Tamilnadu, Meghalaya, Mizoram, etc.). Where English is the main lingua franca or where tuition in English is common, bilingualism in English ranges between 6-8% (Khasi [M-Kh.], Mizo/Lushai [TB], ManipurilMeithei [TB], Bengali) to 10% (Tamil [Dr.]) or 15% (Konkani, Malayalam [Dr.]). Elsewhere bilingualism in English is at most 2-4% (Marathi, Oriya, Telugu [Dr.], Kannada [Dr.], Hindi-Urdu, Garo [TB], Tangkhul [TB], etc.). The largest native lingue franche (link languages) are Hindi and its Persianized variant Urdu, which on a basic spoken level are virtually one and the same language ("Hindustani" or Hindi-Urdu). Hindi and Urdu differ mainly in script (Devanagari for Hindi, Arabic-based for Urdu) and especially higher vocabulary (Sanskrit-

789

based for [pure] Hindi, Perso-Arabic-based for Urdu and less pure Hindi; English loanwords are frequent in both). In its lingua franca form Hindi-Urdu relies on the standard Hindi dialect (Khariboli), originally spoken only in and around Delhi. With education and migration, standard Hindi is now used as a mother tongue in a much wider area even outside its own region, e.g. in Calcutta (Bengali 60%, Hindi-Urdu 30%), Bombay (Marathi 45%, Gujarati 20%, Hindi-Urdu 20%). The lingue franc he of multilingual Bombay are Hindi-Urdu and English (Marathi is also fairly well-known). Urdu is said to be spoken in its purest form in Lakhnau (India) and Karachi (Pakistan). In South India it is spoken in a variant form called Dak(k)hiniIDakh( a)ni. The local "Hindi dialects" or Hindi-related languages (Greater HINDI) differ considerably from the standard Hindi underlying lingua franca Hindi, which therefore tends to become mixed with non-standard elements. Especially in the central tribal belt, the local lingua franca is usually some of the quite deviant and heavily creolized dialects of HINDI or BIHAR!. In some big cities, such as Bombay, lingua franca Hindi is heavily pidginized (Bazari Hindi 'Bazar Hindi'). Greater HINDI (incl. dialects which are not really mutually intelligible) is the largest Indian mother tongue (officially 40%, with Urdu 45%). Hindi-Urdu is used as a general lingua franca in Pakistan (Urdu) and northern India (mainly Hindi) in all so-called Hindi-speaking states or union territories (Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, New Delhi, Chandigarh). It is furthermore the chief lingua franca of Panjab, Gujarat, Maharashtra, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. (Hindi is now the official language of the singularly polyglot Andaman and Nicobar Islands and an official language of Gujarat along with Gujarati.) Hindi is also an expanding competing general lingua franca all over India except in Tamilnadu. The chief reason for this is that Hindi is the other official language of the Indian Union and the first or second language taught in schools, the second vehicular language after English and the foremost

790

Berti! Tikkanen

language of films. Unlike English, Hindi-Urdu does not depend so much on education for its lingua franca status, which dates from the times of the Moghuls. Urdu is used as a general lingua franca in the whole of Pakistan, although it is a comparatively small mother tongue there (8%) with absolute majority only in Karachi (55%). The reason for its wide spread in Pakistan is its status as the national (and major school) language. It is also the mother tongue or lingua franca among many Muslims in India,4 especially in the Deccan, in its southern variant form called Dak(k)hini. In Hyderabad Dakkhini Urdu is the mother tongue of 45% of the population (the rest being mostly Teluguspeakers, the older ones of which are still largely bilingual in Urdu). Urdu is the official language and lingua franca of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, where the overwhelming majority speaks Kashmiri or Dogri and the largest minorities speak West Pahari (Himachali), Guj(a)ri and various transitional languages/ dialects between Kashmiri and Dogri or Kashmiri and West Pahari. Urdu is also a co-official language of Bihar and some other Indian states. It is not used as a lingua franca in Bangladesh, which belonged to Pakistan until 1971. Where both English and Hindi-Urdu are found as lingue franche, Hindi-Urdu reaches deeper strata in interethnic communication than English. This can be seen from the rates of bilingualism in Hindi-Urdu in areas where Hindi-Urdu is the (main) lingua franca: 9-10% (Gujarati, Marathi), 15% (Panjabi), 25% (Sindhi), > 25% (HINDI, BIHARI, RAJASTHANI and PAHARI dialects). Where Hindi is not a recognized lingua franca, bilingualism in Hindi varies between 0.5% (Tamil) and 4% (Kannada, Mizo), cf. Malayalam 1.3%, Telugu, Assamese 2%, Oriya, Bengali 2.43%. In 1971,30 out of 1,000 non-Hindi speakers claimed Hindi to be their primary contact language. The corresponding figure for Urdu was 5 and for English 25 (Khubchandani 1983: 13-14). In Pakistan bilingualism in Urdu seems to be even much higher than bilingualism in Hindi-Urdu in India. The reasons are that apart from Sindhi and,

in some areas, Pashto, Urdu is the only Pakistani language taught in schools. It is also the medium of instruction in most schools in Pakistan. For its connection with the nationalistic Islamic tradition, Urdu has also a prestige that Hindi lacks in India. The other lingue franche are encompassed within the scope of one or both of these two major generallingue franc he. Hence there are areas with double or triple functionally differentiated lingue franche. Then the local lingua franca is used for immediate interethnic communication. Starting from the northwest, we have Khawar/ Chitrali, which is the lingua franca of the highly multiethnic Chitral District of the Northwestern Frontier Province of Pakistan. (See the relevant map of the northwestern region.) The languages and (partly heterogeneous) ethnic communities of the Khowar lingua franca region are: Yidgha (Pamir Ir.), Wakhi (Pamir Ir.) Kalasha, Phalura, Dameli, Gawar-bati (mostly Afghani refugees), "Shekhani" (= Eastern Kativiri and Kamviri; Nuristani Ir.), Guj(a)ri/Gojri, and Werchikwar, i.e. the Yasin dialect of Burushaski [isolate] (Ghizar District, Northern Areas). Bilingualism in Khowar exceeds 15 % in most parts of Chitral and Ghizar. In the border zone between Khowar and Shina there is a high degree of reciprocal bilingualism. Khowar is also found further east in Ishkoman (Northern Areas), where it is the largest mother tongue in the southern parts of the valley (in the northern part Wakhi is spoken). East and northeast of Khowar, Urdu is the only actual lingua franca, although bilingualism is fairly common in all border zones or overlapping regions (Shina [Kohistani dialect] -> Indus Kohistani and Bateri, Shina Burushaski [isolate], Shina Balti [West Tibetan, TB], Burushaski -> Wakhi [Pamir Ir.]). In Hunza, there is in the midst of Burushaski territory a dwindling central Indo-Aryan dialect, Domaki. The gypsy-like Domakis are all bilingual in Burushaski. Domakis live in other parts of the Northern Areas as well, but there they speak Shina. South of the Khowar lingua franca region, and partly overlapping with it, we have Pashta (East Ir.), the language of the Pathans and the lingua

Indian Subcontinent: interethnic communication languages

franca of the rest of the Northwestern Frontier Province down to the town of Quetta in northwestern Baluchistan. The languages and ethnic groups coming within the lingua franca scope of Pashto are Phalura, Dameli, Gawar-bati, "Shekhani" (Kamviri), DirilKalami Kohistani (= Garwi/Gowri/Bashkarik), Torwali, Ushojo, Guj(a)ri/Gojri, Indus Kohistani (not mutually intelligible with Kalami Kohistani and Torwali of Swat Kohistan), the Kohistan dialect of Shina, Ormuri (East Ir.), Waneci (sometimes considered a dialect ofPashto) and Balochi (West Ir.). Pashto is an expanding lingua franca (and business and school language) in the northwest, being also known by many Khowar and some Kalasha speakers. It is hardly at all known north(east) of Indus Kohistan. East of Pashto various more or less mutually understandable Panjabi-related languages (Hindko, or more properly HINDKO, Dhanni, Pothohari, Punchi, Chibhali, etc.) are spoken. 5 Hindko functions as the chief lingua franca on both sides of the Indus in Upper Panjab and Hazara. There is a fair amount of reciprocal bilingualism Pashto-Hindko in this area, where several Pathans have shifted to Hindko due to migration. Towards South(west)ern Panjab, the Panjabirelated dialect continuum (Siraikil Multani, etc.) merges into Sindhi (the northernmost dialect of which is also called SiraikilVicholi), and the border zone is an area of fairly high (reciprocal) bilingualism (Siraiki Sindhi). West of this region we have the BalochiBrahui (semi)nomadic complex, where a small North Dravidian language (Brahui) is spoken in the midst of an Iranian language (Balochi). Both these communities display considerable reciprocal bilingualism and language shift. Further south, in Sindh, Urdu is the lingua franca. Within the Hindi-Urdu lingua franca region of northern and central India, there are a couple of minor local lingue franche, used mainly at the tribal level. In northwestern Himachal Pradesh we have Pat(ta)niIManchat(i) (Himalayan subbranch of TB) in the polyglot Lahul District (with "Chamba Lahuli" [TB), a cover term for PattanilManchat(i)-

791

Bunani-Tinani/Rangloi, and Tod [TB], Chinali and Lohari; not indicated on the map) In the polyglot eastern Chota Nagpur District of Bihar, the local lingua franca is Sadri (the lingua franca name for the creolized form of Sadani/Nagpuria). Tribes using Sadri as a lingua franca are Mundari, Korwa, Turi, Asuri (all speaking mutually understandable Munda languages) and Kurukh (Dr.). Hal(a)bi, spoken in the Bastar District of southeastern Madhya Pradesh is used as a lingua franca by the local Gonds (Maria and Muria tribes), part of whom speak Gondi (Dr.), Chattisgarhi or Bhatri. In central India many tribes come under two or more lingue franche. In Chota Nagpur, Sadri is the lingua franca of 40% of the Kurukh (Dr.) and 30% of the Mundari (Mu.) speakers. Towards the south, these tribes are bilingual in Oriya, towards the east in Bengali. In the Bastar District, the Gonds, who elsewhere speak dialects of Gondi (Dr.), speak a creolized form of Oriya, called Bhatri. As a lingua franca they use Hal(a)bi. In Madhya Pradesh, the Gonds are usually bilingual in various forms of Eastern Hindi (Chattisgarhi, Bagheli: > 30%), in Maharashtra in Marathi (30%) or Hal(a)bi, in Andhra Pradesh in Telugu (Dr.) (19% [1961]). In western Madhya Pradesh, too, many tribes have several contact languages. The Korkus, the westernmost Munda tribe in the Satpura and Mahadeo Hills between southwestern Madhya Pradesh and northeastern Maharashtra are usually bilingual in RAJASTHANI and/or (Western) HINDI dialects (Bundeli, etc.) and/or Marathi. The numerous Bhili dialects of the hilly tracts of western Madhya Pradesh and the adjacent regions are in contact with RAJASTHANI and Gujarati, but only 2% of all Bhili speakers are bilingual in one or both of these languages (total bilingualism for Bhili is 5%). Towards the south, Bhili speakers come in contact with Khandeshi and Marathi speakers, the latter being the dominant language. In northeastern Maharashtra the central Dravidian tribes speaking Kolami, Naiki and Gondi are almost all bilingual in Marathi.

792

Berti! Tikkanen

In northwestern Gujarat, there is considerable reciprocal, but partly perhaps passive bilingualism between Kacchi (a kind of intermediate form between Sindhi and Gujarati) and the Kathiawadi dialect of Gujarati. Northeast of the vast Hindi-Urdu lingua franca region we have NepalilGorkhali, the Indo-Aryan lingua franca of Nepal, Sikkim, southern Bhutan, the Darjeeling District of West Bengal and parts of western Arunachal Pradesh. (See the relevant map for the northeastern area.) Most of the different tribes or ethnic communities coming under the lingua franca scope of Nepali belong linguistically to quite heterogeneous Tibeto-Burman subbranches (BhotialBodishl"Tibetan", Himalayish, ArunachalINorth Assam group, and in Nepal only: Kiranti/Bahing- Vayu group, Newari, Gurung, etc.). In Bhutan, with its dozen different TibetoBurman languages, the major general lingua franca is the national language, Dzongkha (or Lhoke, a dialect of Tibetan). East of Nepali, the main lingua franca is Assamese (Assam and Arunachal Pradesh). In Arunachal Pradesh with its numerous TibetoBurman languages, Assamese was used as a medium of instruction until 1965. Since then Hindi and English have taken over. Bilingualism in Assamese is still fairly high in Assam (where Assamese is the official regional language and mother tongue of half of the population) and Arunachal Pradesh. For instance, three fourths of the Miri (ArunachalINorth Assam subgroup of TB) speakers are bilingual in Assamese, 60% of the Lalung (Bodo-Garo subbranch of TB) speakers, slightly more than half of the BodolBara (TB) speakers (10% in Bengali), almost half of the Mikir (Bodo-Garo subbranch of TB) speakers, but only 10% of the Garo (Bodo-Garo subbranch of TB) speakers (4% in Bengali) and 8% of the Dimasa (Bodo-Garo subbranch of TB) speakers (18% in Bengali). 9% of the Nepali speakers of India are bilingual in Assamese (15% in Hindi). Most of the tribes using Assamese as a lingua franca are speakers of two subbranches of Tibeto-Burman: ArunachalINorth Assam group and Bara-Bodo group.

Further east, Assamese appears in a heavily pidginized form, Nagamese, as a lingua franca of the highly polyglot Nagaland, where English is the only official language. Bilingualism is very low between the still rather ferocious Naga tribes, who speak more than a dozen Naga languages (subbranch of TB). 14 of the Naga languages are or have been used as media of instruction in Nagaland. Bilingualism in Assamese (and/or Nagamese?) is less than 10%. North of Nagaland, in the Tirap District of Arunachal Pradesh, the local lingua franca for the many Kachin dialects and Khamti (and some other Kam-Tai dialects) is Singpho, a distinct subbranch of Tibeto-Burman. South of N agaland the lingua franca is ManipurilMeithei (Kuki-Chin subbranch ofTB), the chief mother tongue of the state of Manipur. It is known by many other surrounding tribes speaking languages belonging to the Kuki-Chin subbranch of Tibeto-Burman, e.g. Tangkhul, Thado, etc. (bilingualism 30-40%). To the (south)west of this Tibeto-Burman complex, we have Bengali, the official language and lingua franca of Bangladesh, West Bengal and Tripura (where the multi-ethnic minority language is Tripuri of the Bodo-Garo subbranch of Tibeto-Burman). Bengali is further used as a lingua franca in the Cachar District of Assam, where Bishnup(u)riya [a kind of mixture of Bengali-Assamese and Manipuri] and Dimasa (TB) ar spoken. Bengali is highly diversified and some of its regional dialects could be considered distinct languages (e.g. Chittagong, Chakma, Sileti, Rajbanshi, Hajong). Although as many as 99% of the population of Bangladesh speak various dialects of Bengali, this leaves 1 million speakers of hardly 20 minority and tribal languages (mainly in the southeast and northwest), using Bengali as a lingua franca: Chakma, Marma/Burmese (TB), Paliya (= Santali) (Mu.), Garo (TB), Manipuri (TB), Tripuri (TB), Mro (TB), Tanchengya (TB), etc. In West Bengal at least 10% of the population speak various minority languages (mainly dialects of Hindi, Bihari and Santali). Most Santali speakers and the few Mundari speakers of West

Indian Subcontinent: interethnic communication languages

Bengal are bilingual in Bengali. For historical reasons Bengali is fairly well-known also in the border regions in Assam and Orissa (Assamese 10% Bengali 6% [read: 10% of all Assamese-speakers are bilingual in Bengali, 6% of all Bengali-speakers are bilingual in Assamese]; Dimasa [TB] 18% Santali), the Bedias, the Pahariyas, the ChikBaraiks, the Lohras, the Kawars, and the Halbas (majority speaking Chattisgarhi, the rest Halbi). They have all totally abandoned their languages chiefly for Chattisgarhi and/or Sadri. The Binjhwars have switched to Chattisgarhi or Oriya. The Kisans of northwestern Orissa, on the other hand, still reveal their Munda or Dravidian origin, though speaking mainly Oriya, Sadri or Chattis garhi. In the Deccan most tribes have long since been linguistically assimilated to the dominating Dravidian languages. The Chenchus and Yerukalas in Andhra Pradesh speak Telugu (Dr.), the latter partly Tamil (Dr.), The Koragas at the Ghats of Mangalore speak Tulu (Dr.), the Yeravas in Coorg speak a distinct dwindling dialect of Malayalam (Dr.), some of the so-called Kurumba tribes in the Nilgiri Hills speak a dialect of Kannada (Dr.). At the Ghats of Kerala there are small tribes of negroid or veddo-australoid type that resemble the Veddas of Sri Lanka. Such are the Pulayans, the Kanikkars, the Muthuvans, the lrulars and the "Malayalis", who now all speak Malayalam (Dr.) and/or Tamil (Dr.). It is not impossible that these

aboriginal tribes spoke some language related to the extinct Yedda language of the dwindling Veddas of Sri Lanka. The latter now speak either Tamil- or Sinhalese-based Yedda creoles. Small Dravidian tribal languages, such as Toda (700) and Kota (800) are rare in the Deccan. Most of the more than a dozen aboriginal Andamanese tribes/languages of the Andaman Islands have disappeared with the partial disappearance of the tribes themselves. Of the Great Andaman tribals only 28 remained in 1982, and of these only 5 spoke a North Andamanese creole based on Jeru and Kora. Now mostly Hindi and possibly Bengali have become the mother tongue of the few surviving Great Andaman tribals. The Southern and Little Andamanese languages Jarawa and Onge still have a few hundred bilingual speakers. The North Sentinelese, on the other hand, have resisted any contacts with outsiders, but nothing about their language and little about their demographic strength is known. Only a few of the Austroasiatic tribes of the Nicobar Islands seem to be in danger of losing their ethnic language. Yet it should be stressed that there are also numerous cases where high level of bilingualism has not led to language shift. Three-fourths of the Miris in Arunachal Pradesh and half of the Mikirs in Assam are bilingual in Assamese, yet maintaining their own language to a remarkable extent.

Notes Acknowledgements: Dr Anita Ganguly has kindly enlightened me on some of the lingue franche and bilingualism situations in northeastern, central and southern Inda. Mrs Virpi Hameen-Anttila has helped me a lot in designing the maps. While acknowledging my debt to them both, I release them from the responsibility for any errors in the maps or text. 1. The main external sources used in this article for drawing the language maps and/or obtaining statistical information (demographic,

bilingualism, etc.) are: Grierson (ed.) (19031928), Breton (1976), Asher (ed.) (1994a), O'Leary (ed.) (1992), Mahapatra et al. (eds.) (1989), Annamalai (1990, 1994), Morshed (1994), Michailovsky (1994), Sanmugadas (1994), Shackle (1994), Mahapatra (1990), Nigam (1972), Khubchandani (1978, 1983) and Burman 1969. The statistics derive mainly from the 1981 census. Sometimes the 1961 census is cited, because it gave statistics about all Indian mother tongues. The official statistics for bilingualism is somewhat

Indian Subcontinent: interethnic communication languages

skewed, since not more than two contact languages for each person were recorded by the census enumerators. 2. The present (1988) three-language formula in Indian school requires that three languages be studied as compulsory subjects for the class 10 examination: (1) the mother tongue or the regional language, (2) Hindi or English (official languages of the Union), (3) a further regional or classical Indian or foreign language not covered under (1) and (2), and other than the language used as the medium of instruction. Students in Manipur may offer Manipuri and those in Sikkim may offer Nepali, Limbu, Lepcha or Bhotia. So too, Tibetan schools may offer Tibetan and those in "foreign schools" may offer Arabic (Krishna 1991: 89; 76-116). In other South Asian countries usually only two modem languages are taught in schools.

797

3. "A language that is used habitually by people whose mother tongues are different in order to facilitate communication between them" (1953 UNESCO Conference on Vernacular Languages; Barotchi 1994: 2211a). This implies that a lingua franca has at least two non-native speaker groups. Often lingue franc he are mixed or pidgnized forms of regular languages. 4. In 1971 Urdu was the mother tongue of 46.57% of all Muslims in India: 10.48% in West Bengal, 93.74% in Andhra Pradesh (Dua 1985: 358). 5. These languages/dialects are sometimes subsumed with SiraikiIMultani under the title LAHNDA, which with Panjabi would form Greater PANJABI. 6. There are two Ho-speaking tribes: proper Hos (Larka Kol, 499,000) and Kols or Kolhas (432,000).

References Annamalai, E. 1990 "Linguistic dominance and cultural dominance: A study of tribal bilingualism in India", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 19 (2): 1-15. Also in: Pattanayak (ed.) 1990: 25-36. 1994 "India: Language situation", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 1651-1653. Asher, R.E. (section editor) 1994a "The languages of South Asia from Iran to Bangladesh", in: Moseley-Asher (eds.), 1994: 203-210; Chapter 4. South Asia: Maps 54-57. Asher, R.E. (editor-in-chief) 1994b The Enclyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford, New York, Seoul, Tokyo: Pergamon Press. Barotchi, M. 1994 "Lingua Franca", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 2211. Breton, Roland J.-L. 1976 Atlas geographique des langues et des ethnies de I' Inde et du Subcontinent:

Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhoutan, Sikkim. (Travaux du Centre International de Recherche sur Ie Bilinguisme, A-10.) Quebec: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval. Burman, B.K. Roy 1969 "Languages of the tribal communities of India and their use in primary education", in: Poddar (ed.), 1969: 251-259. Dua, Hans R. 1985 "Sociolinguistic inequality and language problems of linguistic minorities in India", in: Wolfson-Manes (eds.), 1985: 355-372. Fishman, Joshua A. (ed.) 1978 Advances in the study of societal multilingualism. The Hague: Mouton. Grierson, George A. (ed.) 1903-1928 Linguistic Survey of India. 11 volumes. Calcutta 1903-1928. Reprint: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1973. Khubchandani, L.M. 1978 "Distribution of contact languages in India", in: Fishman (ed.), 1978: 553-585.

798

Bertil Tikkanen

1983 Plural languages. Plural cultures: communication, identity, socio-political change in contemporary India. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Krishna, Sumi 1991 India's living languages. The critical issues. New Delhi: Allied Publishers Limited. Mahapatra, B.P. 1990 "A demographic appraisal of multilingualism in India", in: Pattanayak (ed.), 1990: 1-14. Mahapatra, B.P.-G.D. McConnell-P. Padmanabha-V.S. Verma 1989 The written languages of the world: a survey of the degree and modes of use. Volume 2: India, Book 1: Constitutional languages. Book 2: Non-constitutional languages. (Office of the Registrar General, India. Centre International de Recherche sur Ie B ilingualisme/International Center for Research on Bilingualism. General editors: Heinz Kloss--Grant McConnell). Quebec: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval. Michailovsky, Boyd 1994 "Bhutan: Language situation", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 339-340. Morshed, AK.M. 1994 "Bangladesh: Language situation", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 301-302. Moseley, C.-RE. Asher (eds.) 1994 Atlas of the World's Languages, with 135 Col. Maps. New York & London: Routledge. Nigam, RC. 1972 Census of India 1971. Language handbook on mother tongues in census. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar General, India,

Ministry of Home Affairs. (Census Centenary Monograph, 10.) O'Leary, Clare F. (series ed.) 1992. Sociolinguistic Survey of Northern Pakistan. 5 Volumes. Vol. 1: Languages of Kohistan (by Calvin R Rensch-Sandra J. Decker-Daniel G. Hallberg); Vol. 2: Languages of Northern Areas (by Peter C. Backstrom-Carla F. Radloff); Vol. 3: Hindko and Gujari (by Calvin R. Rensch-Calinda E. Hallberg-Clare F. O'Leary); Vol. 4: Pashto, Waneci, Ormuri (by Daniel G. Hallberg); Vol. 5: Languages of Chitral (by Kendall D. Decker). Islamabad: National Institute of Pakistan Studies and Summer Institute of Linguistics. Pattanayak, Debi Prasanna (ed.) 1990 Multilingualism in India. (Multilingual Matters, No. 61), Clevedon, Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Poddar, A (ed.) 1969 Language and society in India. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study. Sanmugadas, A 1994 "Sri Lanka: Language situation", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 4337-4338. Shackle, C. 1994 "Pakistan: Language situation", in: Asher (ed.), 1994b: 2899-2900. Weinreich, Uriel 1957 "Functional aspects of Indian bilingualism", Word 13, 2. Wolfson, N.-J. Manes (eds.) 1985 Language of inequality. Berlin: Mouton. Zvelebil, Kamil V. 1980 "A plea for Nilgiri areal studies", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 9: 1-22.

Relevant maps Languages of interethnic communication: Indian Subcontinent (excluding Nepal). Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen. Map 91. Languages of interethnic communication: Assam and Bangladesh. Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen. Map 92.

Languages of interethnic communication: Kashmir and East India. Compiled by Bertil Tikkanen. Map 93.

Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas

Trends in Linguistics Documentation 13

Editors

Werner Winter Richard A. Rhodes

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York

Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas Volume 11.2 Texts edited by Stephen A. Wurm Peter M iih1ha us1er Darrell T. Tryon

This Atlas was sponsored by The International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies (UNESCO), The Australian Academy of the Humanities, The International Union ofAcademies, The Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, and The Australian National University, with financial assistance from UNESCO.

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York

1996

Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin.

@ Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines

of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication-Data

Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas / edited by Stephen A. Wurm, Peter Miihlhausler, Darrell T. Tryon. p. cm. - (Trends in linguistics. Documentation; 13) "This atlas was sponsored by the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies ... let al.l" Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 3-11-013417-9 (cloth: alk paper) 1. Languages in contact. 2. Languages, Mixed. 3. Intercultural communication. I. Wurm, S. A. (Stephen II. Miihlhausler, Peter. III. Tryon, Adolphe), 1922D. T. (Darrell T.) IV. International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies. V. Series. PI30.5.A87 1996 402' .23-dc20 96-35866 CIP

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - Cataloging-in-Publication-Data

Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas / ed. by Stephen A. Wurm ... This atlas was sponsored by the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies (UNESCO) ... - Berlin ; New York : Mouton de Gruyter. (Trends in linguistics: Documentation; 13) ISBN 3-11-013417-9 NE: Wurm, Stephen A. [Hrsg.); Trends in linguistics / Documentation; 13 Vol. 2.2. Texts. - 1996

© Copyright 1996 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin

All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Typeset from the author's word files: K. Handwerker, Berlin Printing: Hubert & Co., G6ttingen Cover design: ramminger Kommunikation . Werbung . Design GmbH, Berlin Binding: Liideritz & Bauer-GmbH, Berlin Printed in Germany

Table of Contents Volume 1I.2

China 076. Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area Peter Mtihlhausler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, Stephen A. Wurm

799

077. North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese Stephen A. Wurm

815

078. Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria luha lanhunen

827

079. Tibetan David Bradley

835

080. Yi David Bradley

841

081. Some hybrid languages in China Mei W. Lee-Smith

845

082. The Ejnu language Mei W. Lee-Smith

851

083. The Hezhou language Mei W. Lee-Smith

865

084. The Tangwang language Mei W. Lee-Smith

875

085. The Wutun language Mei W. Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm

883

086. The Mongols in Yunnan Mei W. Lee-Smith

899

VI

Table of Contents

087. An example of multilingualism in the Great Northwest of China Mei W. Lee-Smith

901

088. Hybrid Chinese of the Mongol Period (13th-14th century) Igor de Rachewiltz

905

Korea 089. Some remarks on present-day intercultural communication in South Korea Chu Whan Cha and Stephen A. Wurm

907

Mongolia 090. Contact languages and language influences in Mongolia Stephen A. Wurm with Igor de Rachewiltz

909

Central Asia 091. Languages of interethnic communication in the area of Central Asia and Kazakhstan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov

913

092. Languages of interethnic communication in Uzbekistan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov and Aziz Boltaevic Dzuraev

919

093. Languages of interethnic contacts in Karakalpakistan, the former Karakalpak Autonomous ASSR Ol'ga Doszanovna Nasyrova

925

094. Languages of interethnic communication in Turkmenistan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov

929

095. Languages of interethnic communication in Kazakhstan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov and Baxytzan Xasanovic Xasanov

933

096. Languages of interethnic communication in Kirgizistan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov

937

097. Languages of interethnic communication in Tajikistan Aleksandr Nikolaevic Baskakov

941

Table of Contents

VII

098. Languages of interethnic communication in the Gorno-Badakhshan province of Tajikistan Xosrov Diamsedovic sombezoda

945

099. Shugni as a lingua franca in the Parnir area Stephen A. Wurm

947

100. The languages of the 'Silk Route' up to the 16th century Janos Harmatta

949

Caucasus Area 101. Language situation, language contacts and contact languages in the Caucasus area Stephen A. Wurrn

955

102. The A var language area Mixail Egorovic Alekseev

959

103. The Lezgian languages area Mixail Egorovic Alekseev

963

Siberia 104. Siberia: 1650-1950 ethnic and linguistic changes Stephen A. Wurrn

969

105. Indigenous lingue franche and bilingualism in Siberia (beginning of the 20th century) Stephen A. Wurrn

975

106. Some lingue franche and pidgins in North Siberian and North Pacific areas at the beginning of the 20th century Stephen A. Wurm

979

107. Ethnic composition of the population, ethno-cultural contacts and languages of interethnic communication in the northeast of the Asian coastal areas of the Pacific Ocean Aleksej Alekseevic Burykin

989

108. The Far North-East of Russia Elena Sergeevna Maslova and Nikolaj Borisovic Vaxtin

999

VIn

Table oJ Contents

109. Interethnic contacts of the aboriginal population of Kamchatka Aleksandr Pavlovic Vol odin

1003

110. The linguistic situation on Sakhalin Island Ekaterina Jur'evna Gruzdeva

1007

111. Use of languages in the southern part of the Russian Far East Vladimir I. Belikov

1013

112. 'Govorka'-the pidgin Russian of the Taymyr Peninsular area Evgenij Xelimskij

1033

113. Selkup as lingua franca Evgenij Xelimskij

1035

114. Finger-counting with Buryats and Evenkis in Siberia Buryat finger-counting Elena K. Skribnik

1037

115. Finger-counting with Buryats and Evenkis in Siberia Hand-counting with the Sym Evenkis M. D. Simonov

1039

Arctic Areas 116. History of Eskimo interethnic contact and its linguistic consequences Hein van der Voort

1043

117. Aleut and the Aleuts in contact with other languages and peoples Evgenij Vasil'evic Golovko

1095

118. Semaphoric communication, western Aleuts Stephen A. Wurm, based on Jay E. Ransom

1103

Canada, Northwest Coast and Alaska 119. Interethnic communication in Canada, Alaska and adjacent areas Peter Bakker and Anthony P. Grant

1107

120. Michif and other languages of the Canadian Metis Peter Bakker and Robert A. Papen

1171

121. Chinook Jargon and its distribution in the Pacific Northwest and beyond Anthony P. Grant

1185

Table a/Contents

122. The Russian language in Alaska and in Alaskan native languages Michael Krauss

IX

1209

United States Area 123. Native American contact languages of the contiguous United States Emanuel 1. Drechsel

1213

124. The Plains Indian Sign Language Allan R. Taylor

1241

Mexico 125. Languages of intercommunication in Mexico Beatriz Garza Cuar6n and Doris Bartholomew

1253

Central America 126. Restructured languages in the Caribbean area John Holm

1291

127. Negerhollands Cefas van Rossem

1307

128. Island Carib Willem F. H. Adelaar

1323

South America 129. Quechua, a language of intercultural communication in the Middle Andes Willem F. H. Adelaar

1325

130. Aymaran, the Lake Titicaca area, and the central part of the Pacific coastal area of Peru Willem F. H. Adelaar

1331

X

Table of Contents

131. Araucanian, a language of intercultural communication in the Southern Andes Willem F. R. Adelaar

1333

132. Media Lengua in Ecuador Pieter Muysken

1335

133. Callahuaya in Bolivia Pieter Muysken

1339

134. The Tupi-Guarani languages of Atlantic South America, and Linguas Gerais Willem F.R. Adelaar

1343

135. Areas of multilingualism in northern South America Willem F.R. Adelaar

1345

136. Berbice Dutch Creole Silvia Kouwenberg

1347

Literacy and modern media in communication in the Pacific Area 137. Literacy in Oceania Darrell T. Tryon

1357

138. Modem media in the Pacific area and their role in intercultural communication Peter Mtihlhausler, Malcolm Philpott and Rachel Trew

1389

Subject finder list to the text volume

1455

Volume 11.1 Australia 001. General remarks on Australia Michael Clyne 002. Post contact languages in mainland Australia after 1788 Peter Mtihlhausler

1 11

Table oJ Contents

XI

003. Koines and indigenous lingue franche in Australia Peter Mtihlhausler and Rob Amery

17

004. Early language contact in Tasmania Terry Crowley

25

005. Pidgin English in New South Wales Rob Amery and Peter Mtihlhausler

33

006. Language contacts and Pidgin English in Victoria Ian D. Clark, Peter Mtihlhausler and Rob Amery

53

007. Pidgins and creoles of Queensland Peter Mtihlhausler

69

008. Nineteenth century language contact in South Australia Ann Dineen and Peter Mtihlhausler

83

009. Post-contact languages of Western Australia Peter Mtihlhausler and William McGregor

101

010. Post-contact Aboriginal languages in the Northern Territory Peter Mtihlhausler

123

OIl. Aboriginal English Diana Eades 012. The diffusion of Pidgin English in Australia Peter Mtihlhausler

133 143

New Zealand 013. General introduction and notes on the Map 'Aotearoa - New Zealand: population, ethnicity, languages' Chris Come and Hans-Peter Stoffel

147

014. New Zealand English: Speech Elizabeth Gordon

153

015. New Zealand English lexis Tony Deverson

159

016. The Maori language in New Zealand Richard A. Benton

167

XII

Table of Contents

017. Moriori: language death (New Zealand) Ross Clark

173

018. English-Maori contact languages in New Zealand Ross Clark

175

019. Maori English (New Zealand) Janet Holmes and Allan Bell

177

020. The Indians and their languages in New Zealand Chris Come

183

021. Pacific Island languages in New Zealand Clive H. Beaumont

185

022. The Dalmatians and their language in New Zealand Hans-Peter Stoffel

191

023. The New Zealand Chinese Mary Roberts

195

024. The Germans and their language in New Zealand James N. Bade

201

025. The Poles and their language in New Zealand Sarah Cozens

203

026. The Greeks and their language in New Zealand Chris Come

205

027. The Dutch and their language in New Zealand Robert H. Leek

207

Melanesia 028. Languages in contact in Central and South-east Mainland, Papua New Guinea Tom Dutton

213

029. Other pidgins in Papua New Guinea Tom Dutton

215

030. Privately owned Mekeo-based trade languages Alan A. Jones

219

031. Hiri Motu Tom Dutton

225

Table oJContents

XIII

032. Hiri trading languages Tom Dutton

233

033. Pidgin Fijian and Pidgin Hindustani in Fiji Jeff Siegel

237

Metropolitan languages (in part including pidgins and creoles) 034. The English language in the Asia Pacific region Jeff Siegel

241

035. French in the South Pacific Chris Come and Jim Hollyman

251

036. The Creole language Tayo and language contact in the 'Far South' region of New Caledonia Sabine Ehrhart-Kneher and Chris Come

265

037. Spanish in the Pacific John .M. Lipski, with P. Mtihlhausler and F. Duthin

271

038. Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Pacific and Western Pacific rim Alan N. Baxter

299

039. Dutch in the Pacific area Peter Mtihlhausler

339

040. German in the Pacific area Peter Mtihlhausler

345

041. The spread of Russian settlement and language in Siberia from the sixteenth century onwards D. Rodionov

353

042. Japanese language in the Pacific Peter Mtihlhausler and Rachel Trew

373

Pidgins (General and English) 043. Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands Peter Mtihlhausler, Tom Dutton, Even Hovdhaugen, Jeff Williams and Stephen A. Wurm

401

XIV

Table oJContents

044. Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages Peter Mtihlhausler, Tom Dutton, Darrell T. Tryon, Stephen A. Wurm

439

045. English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 19th century (excluding Australia) Darrell T. Tryon, Peter Mtihlhausler, Philip Baker

471

046. English-derived contact languages in the Pacific in the 20th century (excluding Australia) Peter Mtihlhausler and Philip Baker

497

047. Palmers ton English Sabine Erhart-Kneher

523

048. Productive fellow Philip Baker

533

049. The development and diffusion of pronouns in Pacific Pidgin English Philip Baker and Peter Mtihlhausler

537

050. The origins and diffusion of Pidgin English in the Pacific Philip Baker and Peter Mtihlhausler

551

Languages used in the domain of religion in insular southeast Asia and Oceania 051. Mission and church languages in Papua New Guinea Malcolm Ross

595

052. Mission and church languages in Island Melanesia Darrell T. Tryon

619

053. Philippines: mission and religious languages Andrew Gonzalez

625

054. Languages used in the domain of religion in Indonesia Charles E. Grimes

633

Arabic-based and other contact languages on maritime trade routes to China 055. The potential for the development of Arabic-based and other contact languages along the maritime trade routes between the Middle East and China, from the start of the Christian era Philip Baker

637

Table a/Contents

XV

South-East Asia (Insular, including Irian Jaya) 056. Malay: its history, role and spread Compiled by K. Alexander Adelaar and D. J. Prentice, with contributions from C.D. Grijns, H. Steinhauer and A. van Engelenhoven

673

057. Contact languages in Indonesia and Malaysia other than Malay K. Alexander Adelaar

695

058. Some trade languages of insular South-East Asia and Irian Jaya Mark Donohue

713

059. Notes on the use of Geser as a trade language in eastern Indonesia Mark Donohue

717

060. Indonesian-the official language of a multilingual nation Charles E. Grimes

719

061. Malay-the national language of Malaysia K. Alexander Adelaar

729

Philippines 062. Major languages of wider communication and Trade Languages of the Philippines Stephen A. Wurm

735

063. Intercommunication between speakers of minor languages in the Philippines Stephen A. Wurm

737

Taiwan 064. The lingue franche in Taiwan Paul Jen-kuei Li

741

South-East Asia (Continental) 065. Burmese as a lingua franca David Bradley

745

066. Kachin David Bradley

749

XVI

Table oJ Contents

067. Lahu David Bradley

753

068. Nagamese David Bradley

757

069. Nepali as a lingua franca David Bradley

763

070. BantawaRai David Bradley

773

07l. Empires and lingue franche in premodern South-East Asia David Bradley

775

072. Southwestern Dai as a lingua franca David Bradley

779

073. Vietnamese David Bradley

783

074. Yunnanese Chinese David Bradley

785

Indian Subcontinent 075. Languages of interethnic communication on the Indian Subcontinent (excluding Nepal) Bertil Tikkanen

787

China

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area Peter Miihlhausler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, Stephen A. Wurm Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. 1. Introduction This text, like the Atlas Text on Japanese (The Japanese language in the Pacific by Peter Miihlhliusler and Rachel Trew), is dealing with a very complex situation and very considerable time depth. It is, however, not possible to provide an extensive account of contact between Chinese and other languages, nor is it possible to give evenhanded treatment to the various locations and historical periods. It seemed nevertheless useful to bring together some themes highlighting the role of interaction with other languages in the history of Chinese. The scope of this text and accompanying maps is considerably wider than that by T'sou (1983). It also differs from the information presented in the Language Atlas of China (Wurm et al 19871980) in a number of ways:

(a)

new information about contact languages within China has come to light which has not been considered in the previous Atlases; (b) emphasis is given to the dynamics of the linguistic picture; (c) developments inside China are given more prominence.

The article is arranged into three main parts: (a)

Chinese within China in contact with other languages; (b) Chinese in South East Asia; (c) Chinese in Oceania. Further information on Chinese in contact with other languages can be found in the Section 5, Chinese Pidgin English (in the 19th and 20th centuries) of the Atlas text English-derived

contact languages in the 20th century (excluding Australia) by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker (also in the Atlas text Pidgin English in the Pacific in the 19th century by Darrell Tryon, Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker) and in Section 4, Kiautschou in the Atlas text German in the Pacific area by Peter Miihlhliusler. 2. Chinese in contact with other languages in Continental China There is a large number of non-Chinese languages in various parts of Continental China, especially in the northeast, central north, west and southwest. In view of the large-scale immigration of Chinese speakers into most of these areas, into some of them already a long time ago, into others more recently to quite recently, there have been contacts between them and their language(s) and the indigenous populations and their languages at different times and of different intensity. In most cases, such contacts resulted in Chinese loanwords entering these other languages, and of acti ve (or passive) bilingualism in Chinese spreading more and more among speakers of such other languages. In some more instances, Chinese became an element in the setup of hybrid languages, especially in the central north, with the origin of such hybrid languages being usually a non-Chinese language with a varying mixture of usually strongly influenced and altered Chinese vocabulary, and the structure of the language reflecting much of the original language or languages, but with simplifications, modifications, and innovations. Cases such as the Hezhou language in Gansu which is a Turkic Salar (Uighur) and Chinese hybrid, and the Wutun language in Qinghai which is a Bao'an Mongolian, Tibetan and Chinese hybrid, have

800

P. Miihlhiiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

been described in this volume by Mei Lee-Smith and Mei Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm in their texts The Hezhou language and The Wutun language. Several of the small Mongolian languages in the central north, especially Dongxiang (Santa), Bao' an and also Monguor (Tu), show quite strong Chinese influence, especially in their vocabulary, and Dongxiang (Santa) also in its phonetics and phonology (Field 1994). Another direction of influence is observable in the Tangwang language of the Dongxiang language area which has been described by Mei LeeSmith in this volume in her text The Tangwang Language. This is originally Chinese and in it, in contrast to what has happened in Hezhou and Wutun in which the tones of Chinese words have decayed (in Hezhou) or been lost (as in Wutun), the words of Chinese origin in Tangwang have four (tending towards three) tones, though they differ from standard Mandarin. Grammatically, the language is largely Dongxiang (Santa) Mongolian or is at least patterned on it. Remarks on the historical Mongol-Chinese hybrid language used in the Mongol period (13th14th century) in China are given by deRachewiltz in his contribution to this volume entitled Hybrid Chinese of the Mongol period (l3th-14th century). To this, one can add information given in an Adelaide (South Australia) news publication of 1878, The Nation, No. 269, p. 118 on the beginning formation of a hybrid Chinese Pidgin consisting of elements from the Canton, Shanghai and Nanking varieties of Chinese: There is also, singularly enough, a native Chinese dialect in process of formation, which is to the colloquial of the district in which it exists what "pidgin" is to pure English. One effect of the Taiping rebellion, which caused an influx of natives from the districts of Central China to Shanghai, was to cause the formation of a fused dialect, consisting of words indifferently taken from those spoken at Shanghai, Canton, and Nanking. No great growth of this speech has been noticeable

since the rebellion was crushed; but it bade fair at one time to contribute another to the already numerous varieties spoken in different parts of the empire. It is not impossible that events will some day bring about this result, in which case it will probably attract considerable attention on the part of sinologues, as the tonal rules hitherto in force will be subjected to new and curious violations. In situations in which Chinese in continental China come into contact with speakers of other languages, and bi-lingualism results from this, such bilingualism is mostly only one-way, with the speakers of the other languages acquiring a knowledge of Chinese, but the Chinese remaining monolingual in their language. However, Janhunen, in his contribution to this volume, entitled Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria mentions that in the Khamnigan Mongol speaking area in northwestern Manchuria, there are examples that Khamnigan Mongol has been adopted for daily communication by some of the Han Chinese individuals today living among the Khamnigans. At the same time, Mei LeeSmith in her Atlas contribution entitled An example of multilingualism in the Great Northwest of China points out that in the multiethnic Bortala region in the extreme west of Xinjiang, the speakers of non-Chinese language such as Uighur, Kazakh, Oirat Mongol, Xibo etc. are generally multilingual and are familiar with Chinese as one of their languages; the Han Chinese are mostly monolingual in Chinese. Because of the extensive multilingualism in that area, Chinese has however not become a general lingua franca, and for instance, Uighur and Oirat Mongol speakers would communicate with each other either in Uighur or Oirat Mongol, but not in Chinese. The only common instances of bilingualism (or bidialectism) of Chinese speakers is encountered in border areas between different and not mutually intelligible varieties of Chinese, or in areas in which there is a mixed Chinese

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

population speaking mutually unintelligible fonns of Chinese. In such instances, Chinese speakers tend to be passively or actively bilingual in their own variety of Chinese, and one or several other relevant varieties not naturally intelligible to them. This range tends to include varieties of Chinese which have become Chinese fonns of wider areal currency such as Cantonese in southern China, and in recent decades putonghua (Mandarin), the official language of China. A special instance is that of the speakers of the Hakka "dialect" of Chinese who tend to be actively, not passively bi- or multilingual, or bior multi-"dialectal" in other varieties of Chinese. Very few speakers of other fonns of Chinese have a passive understanding of Hakka. In Yunnan in southwestern China, the penetration of Chinese has been relatively recent, mainly in the 19th century, as described by Bradley in his text entitled Yunnanese Chinese in this Atlas. In its increasing role as general lingua franca, Chinese faces competition from estabished local lingue franche such as Southwestern Dai of which Bradley provided a contribution in this volume (Southwestern Dai as a Lingua Franca). Also in Tibetan-speaking areas, competition for Chinese as a lingua franca from Tibetan lingue franche varieties (See Bradley, Tibetan in this volume) is strong. A special situation resulting in the strengthening of the role of a local lingua franca in China and enhancing its function as an international lingua franca involves Standard Mongolian in Inner Mongolia and adjacent areas in northern China. In China, the written fonn of it still employs the traditional vertical Mongolian script, and the literary language form used in writing Standard Mongolian is a somewhat modernized version of the classical Mongolian language of the early Middle Ages which is markedly different from the spoken form of Standard Mongolian. In Mongolia, however, this literary language and the traditional script were abolished, and the script first replaced by a Latin alphabet, and in 1971 by one based on Cyrillic, with the language used in writing the standard form of Khalkha dialect which constituted the

801

official language and lingua franca of Mongolia. It is very close to the spoken form of Standard Mongolian in Inner Mongolia in China, but in contrast to the latter, contains a large number of Russian loan words which has made Khalkha difficult to understand for speakers of Inner Mongolia Standard Mongolian, e.g. in radio broadcasts. However, in the last few years, the traditional Mongolian writing and the classical literary language used for it have been reintroduced in Mongolia (many of its inhabitants who are past middle age are still familiar with it). This makes written communication between inhabitants of Mongolia and Chinese Inner Mongolia possible again. At the same time, a progressing purification of Kha1kha Mongolian from Russian loanwords enhances the mutual intelligibility of the Standard spoken forms of Mongolian very considerably. In Inner Mongolia, this has contributed to a strengthening of the role of Mongolian at the expense of the currency of Chinese as a general lingua franca. Chinese has not only influenced non-Chinese languages within China, but there has been strong, especially lexical, Chinese influence upon languages in present day South East Asia such as Vietnamese (Vietnam was ruled by China for over a thousand years, from 111 BC to 939 AD) (Dinh-Hoa Nguyen 1992) and Thai. Korean and Japanese have been subject to massive Chinese lexical influence for over a thousand years, with a large portion of their vocabularies being of Chinese origin. Chinese loanwords are also present in languages to the west of China, for instance as tenns relating to textiles which travelled west via the Silk Road well over a thousand years ago (Hamilton 1994). However, it is less well known that the Chinese language has absorbed a considerable number of loanwords from languages to the north, west and east. Shen Jiaxuan (1994) distinguishes three layers of such loanwords, each layer belonging to a certain period; the oldest to the Archaic Period (before the third century AD) in which the Chinese borrowed words from probably Turkic tribes to the north of China, and

802

P. Miihlhiiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

later from West Asia and Central Asia, through the intermediary of the Silk Roads. The next layer belongs to the Ancient Period (400-1200 AD) when many Buddhist terms of Sanskrit origin entered Chinese along with the spread of Buddhism in China. The third layer belongs to the Modem Period (1300-1900 AD) in which a large number of modem scientific and technological terms were borrowed directly from the West or through the medium of Japanese. In this period, also a small number of words were borrowed from Mongolian and Manchu. Words borrowed in the Archaic Period from West and Central Asia denote mostly objects of the material culture, especially cultivated plants, minerals, precious stones, metals, textiles, musical instruments and animals. 3. Chinese in South East Asia South East Asia, because of its geographical proximity, has for many centuries been a destination of Chinese trade, settlement and colonization. (For details, see Wang 1978 and 1981.) According to T'sou (1983) the Chinese speaking communities in South East Asia can be subdivided into:

i) ii)

consolidated groupings; conglomerated groupings;

to these we must add: iii)

iv)

groupings naturalized in the sense that they have adopted indigenous languages and cultures; groups that have adopted a metropolitan language, usually English.

The fist division, according to T'sou represents two major social categories: First, the consolidated Grouping, in which the different constituent groups have constituted a sociolinguistic hierarchy such that usually at least one variety of Chinese emerges as the dominant or common

language of the greater community. This we shall call the Sinitic Lingua Franca. Typically the native speaker of the lingua franca does not know the other varieties of Chinese spoken by other members of the ethnic group, whereas the other speakers would tend to speak both their native dialect and the lingua franca as well as possibly other dialects. The choice of the lingua franca is usually related to the numerical majority or the status of its speakers at some initial point in time or is related to certain social-economic domains. Cantonese in Kuala Lumpur and most areas in Viet Nam, Hokkien in Penang, and Teochiu in many towns in J ohor Bahru are good examples of such common languages. Second, the Conglomerated Grouping, in which the different constituent groups have no common language variety amongst themselves so that the only common language they share is an exonormic language, either drawn from the indigenous languages or from other locally significant languages. (T'sou 1983) Groupings that have become naturalized (or assimilated) to local culture are spread over the entire region, though linguistic research on them has been restricted to only a few areas. A well known case is that of the Peranakan Chinese of Java. Rafferty (1984: 247) gives the following background: The history of Chinese contact with insular Southeast Asia dates from the first century A.D., but the Chinese traders did not begin to settle on the north coast of Java and establish their own distinctive Peranakan communities until the thirteenth century. Peranakan identifies a person of mixed blood, and in Dutch colonial times the term was used to refer to anyone of mixed racial ancestry. Thus there were Peranakan Dutch as well as Peranakan Chinese. Originally Peranakan Chinese were the descendants

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

of Chinese men who had settled in Indonesia and married local women. Today the term Peranakan has taken on a sociocultural meaning; it refers to those Chinese who are no longer culturally oriented toward China and who do not speak a Chinese language at home. Although it is impossible to determine the exact number of Chinese living in Indonesia today (the last census to enumerate residents according to race was in 1930), at least 1,370,000 Peranakan Chinese lived in Java in 1983. (Rafferty 1984: 247) Rafferty in her study shows that the Chinese language was replaced, not by a singular indigenous language, but by whatever multilingual repertoire was the most useful at different times in history: Low Malay, Low Javanese, Javanese, Indonesianized Javanese and others. In her own words: The linguistic history of the Peranakan Chinese of Java is that of a community in flux-accepting, rejecting, and reworking various sets of cultural and linguistic symbols. As political lines shifted and the Chinese were included and subsequently excluded from social units, their languages both high and low also shifted. The greatest linguistic change in the Chinese community occurred at the beginning of the twentieth century with the rise in literacy rates and the change in Low Malay from an oral to a literate language. Despite the existence of other literary languages, the Peranakan community maintained Low Malay as its primary literary language until the independence period when standard Indonesian took its place in formal and interethnic communication. The emergence of Indonesianized-Javanese marks the second most significant event in their linguistic history. It symbolizes the end of a series of efforts to assimilate to various

803

social groups by adopting the languages of those groups. This time the Peranakan, no longer imitators but innovators, borrowed elements of local languages and created their own system. They have created them in an effort to accommodate to the contemporary sociopolitical situation. As with other types of culture change, this linguistic process followed a path of nonradical, gradual shiftings of emphasis as sets of symbols were reworked. (Rafferty 1984:269) The story of the Peranakan Chinese is a reminder that language mixing and contacts in a dynamic state of flux over many centuries and the different linguistic outcomes are found at different points in time. It would be quite dangerous to take the current mixed language as a direct index of past history. Another important aspect of this study is that the most dramatic changes in the linguistic picture of this group took place in the last 100 years under the impact of literacy and the development of Indonesia as a nation state. Finally, Rafferty also draws attention to the different wave of Chinese immigrants, a phenomenon encountered again and again throughout the Pacific area. Whereas the first settlers were males who married local women, subsequent migrants often came with family and had much fewer contacts with the local population. Attempts by the Peranakan and the Totok (China born) Chinese to form a single transcript in the 1920s came to nothing and was of little advantage for the inland Chinese to go back to being speakers of Chinese. Rafferty's studies were supplemented by a brief linguistic study of Chinese Indonesian (Dreyfuss-Oka 1979) examining the Creoloid nature of this variety and by a more comprehensive sociolinguistic case study of the Chinese of Pasuruan (Oetomo 1987) which contains an exhaustive list of references to Chinese varieties in South East Asia. Oetomo (p. 208) has the following suggestions for further linguistic studies:

804

P. Miihlhtiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

Exclusively linguistic topics of study abound in Indonesia's Chinese communities. The question of how Chinese children acquire the different codes and loanwords could contribute something towards the theory of child language acquisition in a multilingual society. The varieties of Chinese dialects spoken in communities that maintain and develop their use have not been studied so far: studies on the Chinese dialects spoken in the Riau Islands, in North Sumatra, on Bangka Island, and in West Kalimantan could contribute something towards Chinese linguistics in general. Next to varieties of Chinese spoken in Malaysia and Indonesia mention must be made of a special form of Malay employed by the descendants of the first Chinese settlers in Penang, Melaka and Singapore, a creole or creoloid known as Baba Malay. It was first described by Shellabear (1913) but its linguistic and sociolinguistic importance has only recently been given recognition by Lim (1988). The future of this language is in doubt, especially in Singapore where Mandarin and Standard Malay have begun to replace Baba Malay among younger speakers (Pakir, p.c.) Lim's description concentrates on those features that distinguish Baba Malay from other forms of Malay rather than on the internal variability or developmental history of the language and very considerable scope remains for the study of these aspects and a comparison with other regional creoles such as Malacca Portuguese (Papia Kristang) and the Malay varieties current among Indian immigrants (Chitty-Indian Malay).

4. The most recent phase: the rise of Mandarin Kaplan-Tse (1983) provide a reminder that (p. 82) "one of the strands that runs constant through Chinese history is the quest for a single national language". They also point out that "large-scale activities involving massive govern-mental efforts can only be traced to a period beginning after 1911". This means the time at which the Republic was established.

The developments in mainland Chinese were to have a significant effect in most of the Chinese overseas communities. It appears that there is a growing realization among them that the various dialects are not suited to education, commerce and cultural survival into the 21 st century and that Mandarin should be the language of the educated. The effects of the Mandarin campaign were first felt in Taiwan, which until 1948 was administered as part of the Chinese mainland (but see the Atlas text Japanese Language in the Pacific by Peter Miihlhausler and Rachel Trew, in particular the section 2.2.3, on the Japanese colonization of Taiwan) and has subsequently reached many other parts of the Pacific. A particularly spectacular example is that of Singapore. Taiwan's population were predominantly speakers of South Fukienese (SF). The 1980 census gives the following figures: Mandarin (National Language) Southern Fukieneseffaiwanese Hakka Minority languages

no population estimate 15 million 1 million 200,000

(Kaplan-Tse 1983: 83) The fact that these are the main native languages, must not conceal the fact that Mandarin at that time had become a second language for most Taiwanese. Kaplan and Tse (1983:83) remark: In brief, although Mandarin is not the native language of the majority of the population, as a result of the success of the NLM (National Language Movement) it is de facto a common language for the entire population as well as de jure the national language. And, although it is not useful to try to estimate the number of native speakers of Mandarin, it is possible to provide a sociolinguistic estimate. Except for about one million people in the 40-50+ age group who still cannot speak the NL (National Language) (and except for monolingual speakers of the NL), it would

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

be fair to say that the entire population is bilingual in the NL and a native dialect! language-a diglossic situation in which the NL serves as lingua franca and Southern Fukienese (SF) serves as the major vernacular. (Kaplan-Tse 1983: 83) By the mid 1980s the shift to Mandarin had significantly gained momentum. Young's study (1988: 323-328) has noted a significant shift to Mandarin in the public domain by all Taiwanese and a significant shift to Mandarin in all domains (including many intimate family contacts) by younger speakers. At present about 25% of all children speak Mandarin before school going age and the fact that Mandarin is the only school language and by far the most significant language of radio and television (86% of all programs) are likely to accelerate this trend. The negative effect of these pronounced trends towards monoculture and monolingualism in Mandarin has as yet not been stressed by the Taiwanese government, but Young (p. 337) points out that the outcome is by no means definite. It is true that the small Chinese dialects have almost disappeared but SF and Hakka continue to enjoy widespread support. The results of this study indicate that Southern Min and Hakka are losing ground. They are diminishing because of the policy to promote Mandarin without an active recognition of the value of Hakka or Southern Min cultures. There will likely be more and more grassroots efforts to promote Hakka and Southern Min culture in the future. If the authorities in Taiwan choose to ignore or suppress these grassroots efforts for cultural revival, then a negative attitude will develop toward the government. However, if the authorities in Taiwan choose to promote ethnic pride and cultural revival among the Hakka and Southern Min peoples, then mutual respect among the different ethnolinguistic groups will no doubt develop. (Young 1988: 337)

805

Mei W. Lee-Smith (p.c.) has recently observed an increasing tendency by Taiwanese to mix Southern Fukienese (SF) and Mandarin when speaking Mandarin, with SF being more and more accepted. Another interesting observation by Mei LeeSmith (p.c.) about language use in Taiwan has been that in market situations in which speakers of the autochthonous Austronesian languages offer their wares, Chinese speakers have sometimes been noticed to use at least some words of the Austronesian languages in jargon settings as contact language, rather than Chinese, be it Mandarin or Southern Fukienese. If the policy of the Taiwanese government has been to promote Mandarin by neglecting the other dialects, in Singapore, the suppression of nonMandarin varieties of Chinese have been much more deliberate. In 1980 Kuo (p. 1) reported on the language situation in Singapore as follows: Singapore society is ethnically heterogeneous, with about 76% Chinese, 15% Malay, 7% Indians, and 2% from other ethnic origins. Its language situation is still more diversified since each of the three major ethnic groups speaks many language varieties. A census report identifies more than 33 specific mother-tongue groups, 20 of which with more than 0.1 % of the popUlation as native speakers. Four major languages are designated as official languages: Malay, English, Mandarin Chinese and Tamil. Hokkien, while a major language, is not an official language. In addition, there are three minor languages: Teochew, Cantonese and Hainanese. (Kuo 1980: 1) This policy of egalitarian multilingualism has since given way to a policy of English-Mandarin bilingualism and deliberate official attempts to get rid of Chinese varieties other than Mandarin. The Speak Mandarin Campaign began in the late 1970s following the Goh report of educational policy in 1978. In this report the then Minister of Education, Goh (p. 4), pointed out that:

806

P. Miihlhiiusler, Me; W Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

The majority of the pupils are taught in two languages, English and Mandarin. About 85% of these pupils do not speak these languages at home. When they are at home, they speak dialects. As a result, most of what they have learned in school is not reinforced. As a background to this statement one has to consider that English at the time was gaining considerable prestige and the only way to counteract it was seen in developing a Chinese prestige language, i.e. Mandarin. Bilingualism in English and Mandarin was seen as a way of maintaining the momentum of economic growth whilst preserving significant aspects of Chinese culture. A second part of the argument was that the existence of mutually unintelligible dialects of Chinese could lead to a fragmented society (compare Newman 1980: 10). It may be added here that (Mei W. Lee-Smith, p.c.) knowledge of Mandarin in Hong Kong has been rapidly spreading in recent years, in particular among the young generation. The development of Mandarin as the standard Chinese language has greatly accelerated the decline of the other varieties, even in those areas where other varieties have become established as the vehicles of culture, commerce and intercultural communication. Mandarin, like standard English has also made major inroads into the realm of the smaller non-Chinese languages of South East Asia, Mainland China, Taiwan and Singapore. Like the advance of English, the advance of Mandarin leaves behind it a trail of lost languages, dialects and cultures. 5. Chinese overseas exploration and trade Thus far, this text has been concerned with Chinese settlement, a topic whose linguistic consequences are reasonably well documented. A very different matter is that of Chinese long distance exploration and trade and the languages of intercultural communication used then. Trade in China with the outside world dates back to about 900 A.D. when the old land-based

and riverine cultures spread down the rivers to the sea. Swanson (1982:1) remarks: The fall of the Tang in 907 A.D. coincided with the evolution of maritime China. By then the old riverine culture had spread down the rivers to southeastern coasts. If continental China represented the steadiness of an elder, maritime China was characterized by the unruliness of an adolescent given to disobedience. Over the second thousand years, four dynastiesthe Song (960-1279 A.D.), the Yuan or Mongol (1279-1368 A.D.), the Ming (1368-1644 A.D.), and the Qing (16441912 A.D.)-attempted to handle the challenges posed by sea and travel, ocean trade, and the introduction of foreign ideas. Contacts with Japan, discussed in the Atlas text on The Japanese Language in the Pacific by Peter Miihlhausler and Rachel Trew, are an example of this early maritime expansion. The most ambitious developments occurred roughly at the same time the Portuguese and Spanish began their maritime expansion. In the early Ming Period (1405-1433 A.D.) seven sea voyages to the Indian Ocean and Africa were undertaken (Swanson 1982: 37). The number of ships and people involved is estimated by Swanson (1982: 3) as follows:

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

Expedition 1st (1405-07) 2nd (1407-09) 3rd (1409-11) 4th (1413-15) 5th ? 6th (1421-22) 7th (1431-33)

No. of Ships 317 249 48 63 ? 41 100

Very little is known about the linguistic nature of these encounters between the Chinese and the local residents, But it would seem significant that these encounters involved many Arab traders and sailors as well as Muslim Chinese. The topic of Arabic in the far east trade is discussed elsewhere in this volume in Philip Baker's Atlas text The potential for the development of Arabic-based and other contact languages along the maritime trade routes between the Middle East and China, from the start of the Christian era. Maritime exploration and expansion came to an abrupt end in 1525 when the emperor instructed the coastal officials to destroy all seagoing ships: The timing of Chinese maritime decline could not have been worse, for it coincided with European maritime expansion into Asia. The Portuguese arrived in 1516, and although they were expelled in 1521, their exodus was short-lived. They returned and established settlements in Xiamen in 1544 and Macao in 1535. The Spanish occupied the Philippines in 1564 and established trade relations with China shortly thereafter. Then, in the seventeenth century, the Dutch arrived in Asia just as the Ming dynasty was being conquered by the Manchu cavalry that overran Beijing in 1644. Thus was the stage set for the last foreign imperial rulers in China-the Qing. (Swanson 1982: 43)

No. of People

807

Vessel Types Identified

27,870 ? 30,000 28,560 ? ? 27,550

62 baochuan ? ? ? ? ? ?

6. Chinese labour in the Pacific 6.1. Overview By the late 1880s the practice of the colonizers which relied on Pacific labourers for their rapidly growing plantation and mining industries began to run into major difficulties, as there was a significant population decline in the area and moreover, more protection of the local population from labour recruiters by government submissions. Faced with these problems many Pacific suppliers turned to the Asian labour market. The import of Chinese labourers, mainly from the southern parts of China, Singapore and the Dutch East Indies, let to some important developments in the linguistic ecology of the region. According to Willson-Moore-Munro (1990) the following numbers were involved: Place of Employment Polynesia Samoa Tahiti and dependencies (except Makatea) Melanesia New Caledonia (Asians incl. Chinese) Solomon Islands German New Guinea Fiji Micronesia Nauru

Totals 61,794 6,984

Period 1852-1924 1903-1934

1,100

1865-1867

14,000 1891-1939 c.150 1913-1940 c.2,000 1885-1914 Unknown 34,497

1921-1962

(See Section 3 on Pidgin English in Micronesia in the Atlas text) English-derived contact

808

P. Miihlhiiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

languages in the 20th century (excluding Australia) by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker in this volume) Ocean Island 300-700 anyone time

In general, the influence of Chinese in the area is constrained by a number of facts: i)

numbers-he Chinese in all Pacific territories constituted a minority and typically also a minority among the immigrants/labourers; ii) the system of short-term indenture and racial segregation in many areas reduced the possibility of mutual influence and opportunities for intercultural communication; iii) the Chinese typically arrived after a pidgin language had already established itself; iv) contrary to some claims, there is little evidence that significant numbers of Chinese brought with them a knowledge of Chinese Pidgin English. Let us briefly consider a number of areas for which information is available. 6.2. Hawaii In contrast to other plantation areas, the Hawaii plantations, for many decades, relied predominantly on local labor of Hawaiian and part Hawaiians. As late as 1872, 80% of the labour force were of Hawaiian origin (Willson, Moore, Munro 1990: 80ff), but by 1882 this percentage had dropped to 25 %. Among the first foreign labourers were the Chinese, beginning in 1852. Up to 1865 only 400 Chinese entered Hawaii, many of them from California. Then, until 1885, the planters increasingly relied on Chinese workers, especially with the downturn in the Hawaiian population. In those twenty years another 27,000 Chinese arrived in Hawaii. The planters made repeated attempts to have legislation enacted that would increase their control and discipline over the Chinese workforce, including regulations that would deprive them of their rights to the due process of law. In response, many Chinese labourers refused to renew their contracts, even when the planters offered to

double their wages, or else they simply worked as day labourers. A network developed among the free Chinese labourers that advised them of which plantations had good or bad reputations. Others went into rice production, on land often owned by other Chinese, under far more congenial conditions of employment. A sizeable number moved into the urban sphere and between 1853 and 1900 an average of 31 per cent of the Chinese population lived and worked in Honolulu, or else left Hawaii for California (Willson-MooreMunro 1990: 82). Again, many of these had been in California previously. It appears that the language in the sugar plantations was a revised form of Hawaiian and that most of the plantation Chinese learnt this language as their language of intercultural communication. Bickerton-Wilson (1987: 65) report on their findings, based on numerous sources: According to these accounts, Pidgin Hawaiian was spoken by members of most, if not all, immigrant groups. The Chinese were the most frequently mentioned, but there were also numerous accounts of Hawaiian-speaking Japanese, Filipinos (who did not begin to arrive in Hawai'i until 1907), and Portuguesecontrary to Reinecke's impression that the Portuguese avoided Hawaiian and spoke English almost exclusively. Hawaiian as spoken by non-Hawaiians was clearly never a homogeneous speech variety, but a continuum with quite a wide span. According to Mrs. Mahu'iki, "some Chinese and Japanese spoke as well as Hawaiians," while at the other extreme was an elderly Chinese cook whose utterances characteristically consisted of "one Hawaiian word and the rest Chinese". Recent work by Roberts (1991) confirms this. It is for this reason that their contribution to Pidgin English and Hawaiian English was less in evidence. Speculating on this, Carr (1972: 98)

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

writes, after examining early trade routes between Hawaii and the China coast: Considering these contacts, the early arrival of the Chinese immigrants for plantation labour, and the very substantial Chinese contribution to Island life, we might expect to find a great many expressions from their language in Island English. This in not the case; there are relatively few Chinese loanwords in general use other than family names and terms connected with foods. As suggested before, the short and tonal Chinese words have proved to be elusive and, unlike Japanese and Hawaiian words, they have remained difficult for English-speaking persons to learn and remember. There are several notable exceptions. (Carr 1972: 98) The Chinese subsequently switched to Hawaiian Pidgin English but at that time, they were outnumbered by speakers of many other languages. Carr (1972: 162-165) states concerning the Island expressions with parallels in pidgin and creole languages: To some readers, the most surpnsmg indication of the study will be that so many of the entries (more than one-fifth) should be survivals of some form of pidgin-the original Cantonese pidgin of China or the Melanesian pidgin of the southwest Pacific, brought to the Islands long ago. Linguistic entities-phonetic traits, lexical items, and unique phrases-are often exceedingly long-lived. In Europe, dialect traits have persisted in secluded areas for many centuries. It has been little more than a century, actually, since Cantonese pidgin was used enthusiastically in the China ports and since the days of the fur, sandalwood, and whaling trades when ships stopped regularly in Hawaii, bringing this new "language of business and travel" with them.

809

On closer inspection, two of her list (21 % of 28 or 6 lexical items) were documented in Hawaii before they were in Chinese Pidgin English, others were documented in Tahiti, Australia before they were documented in Hawaii. In the absence of more reliable diachronic data it is difficult to ascertain how many of these parallelisms with Chinese Pidgin English entered Hawaii Pidgin during contact between Chinese and other workers in Hawaii. 6.3. Tahiti The coffee and cotton plantations of Tahiti employed 1,000 indentured Chinese labourers during 1864-5 for a period of seven years. When the company folded in 1872 the Chinese could not be repatriated and they soon came to dominate market gardens, the retail trade and bakeries. Because the ratio of Chinese men to women was very unfavourable (146 men to 1 woman in 1892), intermarriages with the Polynesian population were frequent during this first period. Willson-Moore-Munro (1990:95-96) report on the subsequent wave of free immigrants:

With the waves of free Chinese immigration the sex ratio evened up. Inter-ethnic marriage has become less common and Chinese exclusiveness is more pronounced. On first appearances Chinese society in Tahiti appears to be monolithic and cohesive; in fact it is segmented by affiliation with one or more of the several Chinese associations. At the same time a more francophile Chinese community is evident in that contemporary Chinese children are socialized to a considerable extent by a French education. An associated development is the decline of Chinese-run schools in the territory. The extent of French influence may be gauged from the manner in which the French language has tended to displace the Tahitian language with Chinese children generally being trilingual-fluent in Chinese and French and a speaking knowledge of Tahitian. Another measure

810

P. Mahlhiiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

of French affiliation lies in the political leanings of contemporary Chinese in Tahiti and elsewhere in French Polynesia. They do not have French citizenship and are apolitical in the main. But they generally, if tacitly, take a pro-French stance on the assumption that their security depends on French control being maintained. Today, the part Chinese number about to,OOO. Lavondes (1971: 1112) reports on the language use of this community: It is worth remembering that a second language is a vital necessity for the population of Chinese descent. The demands of commerce, the activity preferred by the Chinese, make it necessary for businessmen in rural areas to be bilingual in Chinese and Tahitian, and in Papeete to be trilingual in Chinese, French, and Tahitian. As a result, the Chinese language has regressed. One important contributing factor has been the requirement since 1938 that Chinese businessmen keep their books in French. For a while, several kept their accounts in both French and Chinese, but this practice is falling into disuse ... There is a tendency for French and Tahitian to enter into the language of daily conversation, producing linguistic melanges of which Moench (1963: 15) gives an amusing example. Linguistic interferences between Chinese and Tahitian are numerous ... They relate not only to phonology, but also to the grammar of Tahitian as spoken by Chinese. Among the urban middle class, this Chinese influence is blamed for the present alteration of the Tahitian language. Research would be necessary to determine whether this argument has any foundation in fact or merely reflects anti-Chinese prejudices. It is also very possible that the knowledge of Chinese, particularly written Chinese, is dying out among the younger generation. This may be inferred from the 1962 census

data: the proportion of persons of both sexes who 'read and write Chinese' is 61 % for the Chinese popUlation aged fifteen and over, only 47% for those between the ages of fifteen and twenty... It should be mentioned, however, that some data indicate that there is a tendency to use spoken and written Chinese in business, where it would aid in insuring secrecy. Thus, in contrast to Hawaii, the Chinese influence on Tahitian has been quite significant and special forms of pidginized Tahitian appear to have become the language of intercultural communication. (See also the Atlas text Post-contact pidgins, creoles and lingue franche, based on non-European and indigenous languages by Peter Miihlhiiusler, Darrell Tryon, Stephen Wurm and Tom Dutton, for pidginized Tahitian.)

6.4. Samoa The Chinese of Samoa were recruited in German days in response to a shortage of Melanesian labourers. Between 1905 and 1913 about 3,800 coolies were brought to Samoa. Recruiting ended after the end of German control and most of the Chinese were repatriated. Less than 500 remain in Samoa today, mainly shop keepers and traders. Miihlhausler has been told by informants that like in Tahiti, a special kind of syncretized Samoan is used by the Chinese in their dealings with the local population, but no data on this are available at present. 6.5. Nauru The history of the Chinese labour migration to Nauru and the development of a mixed ChineseMelanesian Pidgin English has been discussed by Siegel (1990) and in the Atlas text Englishderived contact languages in the 20th century, by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. 6.6. Papua New Guinea There are all together three types of Chinese migrants to German New Guinea. First, a very small number of Chinese traders and bird-ofparadise hunters visited the coastal areas, before

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

Germany claimed the territory in 1884. They brought with them, as Wu (1977:1047) notes: "steel, several kinds of fruit and vegetables, rice, firearms, and 'Chinese Pidgin"'. Most of these early visitors did not come from China but from Singapore and the Dutch East Indies. Between 1889 and 1901 several hundred Chinese were employed on the coastal plantations of Kaiser Wilhelmsland. It appears that they spoke Bazar Malay rather than Chinese Pidgin English. By 1909, only 100 Chinese remained. A third influx of Chinese was centred on Rabaul, the administrative capital of German New Guinea. It resulted from the German encouragement of free Chinese immigration. By 1907 a Chinatown had been built in Rabaul, while on the eve of the first World War in 1914, around 1,400 Chinese had settled in New Guinea, among them about 1,000 living in and around Rabaul. Chinese immigration to New Guinea came to a halt following the takeover of New Guinea by the Australians. Despite all kinds of restrictions placed on them during the Australian Mandate, not only did the Chinese become indispensable in the Territory as artisans but also they built up the trade store business. (Wu 1977: 1048) Most of the more permanent Chinese came from the South of China, speaking four varieties: 1. the See Yap Cantonese dialect - spoken by the See Yap people; 2. the Standard or Capital (Kwangchou) Cantonese dialect-spoken by the Wu Wan people; 3. the Hainan dialect-spoken by the Hainan Islanders; 4. The Hakka dialect-spoken by the Huiyang Hakka people. (Wu 1977: 1049) When Miihlhausler visited Rabaul in 1973 and 1975 his informants claimed that these Chinese spoke a Pidgin English different from the local

811

Tok Pisin, but the exact influence of this Chinese Pidgin English on the development of Tok Pisin remains to be investigated. Wu lists a number of vegetable names such as were introduced by Chinese market gardeners: Chinese Names Pidgin Names English Names Choi Sum Kai Choi KaiLum LauPak Ong Choi Pak Choi Sung Choi ... Tao See Kua Tung Kua WuTau Yin Sai

'Chinese cabbage' 'Chinese mustard' 'Chinese broccoli' 'Turnip' 'Chinese watercress' 'Chinese cabbage' 'Lettuce' 'Beans of several kinds' 'A kind of squash' Sika "'Winter" melon' Tung Ka Taro bilong 'Taro' Saina 'Chinese celery' MinTai ToiTum Kai Toi KaiLun Lau Pak Kangkung (Kango) Pak Toi Sala, Lesis Tao

(Wu 1977: 1053) Wu also remarks that the Chinese tended to speak a little of the local languages of the area where they traded, particularly Chinese-Tolai and Chinese-New Ireland contact languages. These as yet have not been documented. Wu also remarks that changes occurred in the Chinese spoken in Papua New Guinea, changes which are suggestive of the development of a New Guinea Chinese Koine. 7. Conclusions This account of Chinese labour migration and its linguistic importance contains many gaps, particularly about the number of islands where Chinese were in quite significant numbers and, as regards the influence of Chinese migrating from California. As the Chinese tended to keep their linguistic and cultural traditions over generations and as they tended to have their own schools, it seems likely that their dealings with the local population were carried out in pidgin varieties of

812

P. Miihlhiiusler, Mei W. Lee-Smith, S.A. Wurm

the local vernacular. Today, large portions of the Chinese population in the Pacific appear to have switched to one of the metropolitan languages (particularly English and French) and are losing

skills in Chinese. A more detailed study of all these processes would make a good topic for a Ph.D.

References Bickerton, Derek-William H. Wilson 1987 "Pidgin Hawaiian", in: Gilbert (ed.), 6176. Carr, Elizabeth Ball 1972 Da Kine Talk. Hawaii: The University Press of Hawaii. Dinh-Hoa Nguyen 1992 "Vietnamese", in: William Bright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Linguistics 4: 223-231. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press. Field, Kenneth L. 1994 "A comparative analysis of the syllable structures and syllable inventories of Dongxiang and Hui: the effects of contact", University of California, Santa Barbara, Papers No.5: 14-36. Dreyfuss, Gail-Oka Djoehana 1979 "Chinese Indonesian: A new kind of language hybrid". Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-57: 247-274. Gilbert, Glenn G. (ed.) 1987 Pidgin and creole languages. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Goh 1979 "Report on the Ministry of Education 1978", in: Newman (ed.). Hamilton, James 1994 East-West borrowings via the Silk Road of terms relating to textiles. Paper presented at the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies-UNESCO Colloquium Languages and Cultures of the Silk Road, Nicosia, Cyprus, Sept 30-0ct 1, 1994. Haudricourt, Andre Georges 1953 "La place du Vietnamien dans les langues Austroasiatiques", Bulletin de la Societe Linguistique Ie Paris 49: 111-128.

1954 "L'origine des tons en Vietnamien", Journal Asiatique 242: 69-82. Kaplan, Robert B.-J. Kwock-Ping Tse 1983 "The language situation in Taiwan (The Republic of China)", Incorporated Linguist 22: 82-85. Kuo, Eddie C.Y. 1980 "Language planning in Singapore", Language Planning Newsletter 6(2): 1-5. Lavondes, Henri 1971 "French Polynesia", in: Sebeok (ed.), 1110-1128. Lim, Sonny 1988 "Baba Malay: the language ofthe StraitsBorn Chinese". Canberra. Pacific Linguistics A-78: 1-61. Moench, Richard 1963 Economic relations of the Chinese in the Society Islands. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University. Cambridge, Mass. Moore, C.-J. Leckie-D. Munro (eds.) 1990 Labour in the South Pacific. Townsville: James Cook University of Northern Queensland. Newman, Dr John (ed.) 1980 Singapore's speak mandarin campaign: The educational argument. Toowoomba: Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education. Oetomo, Dede 1987 The Chinese of Pasuruan: Their language and identity. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics 0-63. Rafferty, Ellen 1984 "Languages of the Chinese of Java-an historical review", Journal of Asian Studies 43(2): 247-272.

Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area

Roberts, Julian 1991 Pidgin English in Hawaii. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference in Austronesian Linguistics, Honolulu. Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.) 1971 Current Trends in Linguistics, Vol. 8. Linguistics in Oceania. The Hague: Mouton. Shellabear, W.G. 1913 "Baba Malay: an introduction to the language of the Straits-born Chinese", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Straits Branch 65: 49-63. Shen, Jiaxuan 1994 Semantic categories of loanwords as reflected in Chinese characters. Paper presented at the International Council of Philosophy and Humanistic StudiesUNESCO Colloquium Languages and Cultures of the Silk Road, Nicosia, Cyprus, Sept30-0ct 1, 1994 Siegel, Jeff 1990 "Pidgin English in Nauru", Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 5(2): 157-186. Swanson, Bruce 1982 Eighth voyage of the Dragon. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press. T'sou, Benjamin K. 1983 "Distribution of varieties of Chinese in the Greater Pacific area", in: Wurm and Hattori (eds.), Map 37 with text.

813

Wang, G. 1978 The Chinese minority of South-East Asia. Singapore: Chapman (Institute of SouthEast Asian Studies). 1981 Community and nation: Essays on South-East Asia and the Chinese. Singapore: Heinemann!Allen and Unwin. Willson, M.-C. Moore-D. Munro 1990 "Asian workers in the Pacific", m: Moore-Leckie-Munro (eds.), 78-107. Wu, David Y.H. 1977 "Intrusive languages other than English: Chinese", in: Wurm (ed.), 1047-1056. Wurm, Stephen A. (ed.) 1977 New Guinea area languages and language study, vol. 3: language, culture, society, and the modern world. Canberra. Pacific Linguistics C-40. Wurm, Stephen A.-Shiro Hattori. (eds.) 1983 Language Atlas of the Pacific Area, part 2. Canberra: Australian Academy of Humanities, also Pacific Linguistics C-67. Wurm, Stephen A.-Benjamin T'Sou-David Bradley (Australian eds.), Li Rong-Xiang Zhenghui-Zhang Zhengxing-Fu Maoji-Dob Wang Jun (Chinese eds.) 1987-90 Language Atlas of China. Hong Kong: Longman Group (FE) Ltd. Young, Russell L. 1988 "Language maintenance and language shift in Taiwan", Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 9: 323-328.

Relevant maps Chinese Pidgin English in the 19th century. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 52. Principal maritime trade routes in the early part of the Christian era: Arabia to the Far East. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 64. Centres of trade and language contacts, Arabia to the Far East. Compiled by Philip Baker. Map 65. Chinese overseas language contacts and contact languages. Compiled by Peter Miihlhausler and Philip Baker. Map 94.

North China: Intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present . Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm. Map 95. Hybrid languages and contact languages: Northwest China. Compiled by Mei W. LeeSmith. Map 98.

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese Stephen A. Wurm The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Introductory remarks A considerable number of languages other than Chinese are spoken in northern China, with the great majority of them Altaic and belonging to the Turkic, Mongolic and Manchu-Tungusic families, with Korean also regarded as Altaic by a number of scholars. There were, and in many instances still are, various ways of intercultural communication between speakers of such different languages in the past and present such as the use of one of them as a lingua franca, or active and passive one-way or two-way bilingualism, or in more recent times the use of Chinese or earlier on of other languages as lingue franche, especially along the Silk Routes where various Iranian and Indic languages were employed as trade languages in the past, with this probably being, in part, also the reason for some hybrid languages emerging in the general areas of the Silk Route. Relevant texts which deal with aspects of languages of intercultural communication in northern China are J. Harmatta's The languages of the 'Silk Route', J. Janhunen's Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria, M. Lee Smith's The Ejnu language (Uighur-Persian hybrid language in Xinjiang), The Hezhou language (Uighur-Salar and Chinese hybrid language in Gansu), The Tang wang language (Chinese-Dongxiang Mongolian hybrid language in Gansu), M. Lee Smith and S.A. Wurm's The Wutun language (Bao'an Mongolian-Tibetan-Chinese hybrid language in Qinghai), and Lee Smith' Multilingualism in Bortala, Xinjiang). P. Miihlhausler's Preliminary thoughts on Chinese and Chinese contact languages in the Pacific area may also be mentioned here. What is set out below is, in part, a summary presentation of the findings detailed in

these contributions, and in part, additional information on aspects of intercultural communication in some areas of northern China.

Historical Silk Route Harmatta states that the earliest records in archaic China, of language use in what today is northern China, mention that merchants had to provide for as many interpreters as language areas were crossed by them - up to wares being transported with ninefold translation! At a later stage, from the second century B.C. onwards, first Sogdian and somewhat later Indian merchants established commercial relations with China which, with the Han Chinese Empire establishing its supremacy over the Tarim Basin and opening the Silk Routes, led to the use of the Iranian Sogdian and the Indian G andhan ¥ rakrit language as the principal trade and literary languages of the Silk Routes. While Gandharf Prakrit was replaced by Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit in Central Asia a few centuries later, Sogdian became the predominant language of the Silk Routes in Central Asia for a number of centuries afterwards. Later Middle Persian and after it, Neo Persian, was to play the most permanent and important part as language of the Silk Routes in Central Asia and further west. The Arab invasion of Central Asia in the eighth century was an important factor in the language situation changing in favour of Persian. The Persians were converted to Islam and replaced the Sogdians in the silk trade, with Persian becoming the lingua franca in Central Asia for centuries, up to the seventeenth century. In addition, Turkic languages such as Cumanian and Uighur played a part as languages on the Silk Routes, Russian became an important

816

S.A. Wurm

intermediary language in the days of the Mongol Empire, with Mongolian and the Turkic Qipchak and Oghuz languages also having a role on the Silk Routes in Central Asia.

Manchuria: historical and at present

Janhunen states that in Manchuria languages of the Mongolic and Manchu-Tungusic families were spoken predominantly throughout recorded history. A type of Mongolic was the language of political prestige during the rule of the Khitan dynasty (916-1125 AD) and the Yuan dynasty of the Mongols (1271-1368). At the same time, the Southern Manchu-Tungusic Jurchen and Manchu languages played a dominant role during the Jin dynasty (1115-1234) of the Jurchens and during the Qing dynasty (1644-1911) ofthe Manchus. The most archaic and aberrant of the Mongolic languages found in Manchuria today is Dagur, believed by some scholars to be the immediate descendant of the Khitan language. It had entered into a symbiotic relationship with the Tungusic languages spoken near them, with Dagur mostly the dominant language in such relationships and the Tungusic speakers, in particular the Solon Evenkis, being bilingual in Dagur. However, during the historical Manchu domination in Manchuria, many Dagurs used to be bilingual in Manchu. In the middle of the 17th century, the bulk of the Dagur speech community, together with the Solons associated with them, was moved from the Upper Amur area to the Nonni basin in northern Manchuria, with a part of them further shifted to the Hailar basin in northwestern Manchuria, and to the Hi basin in extreme western Xinjiang (Sinkiang). Another archaic Mongolic language spoken by people formed of Mongolic and Tungusic components in roughly equal proportions, is Kharnnigan Mongol, originally located in the area between the Argun and Onon rivers, to the west of Manchuria. A portion of them moved to northeastern Mongolia in 1700, and another to northwestern Manchuria in 1917 where they are today in the Mergel river basin. According to Janhunen, about

a third of the Khamnigans are monolingual in Khamnigan Mongol which is the dominant medium of communication amongst the Khamnigan community. The remaining two thirds of the community speak Evenki and Khamnigan Mongol, with knowledge of both languages acquired by them simultaneously in earliest childhood. Janhunen points out that it is remarkable to note that Khamnigan Mongol has been adopted for daily communication by some of the Han Chinese individuals who live among the Khamnigans. Janhunen mentions that the Buryats lived originally in the Baikal lake region and historically expanded eastwards, towards the sources of the Amur river. After the October Revolution, a part of them moved over to northwestern Manchuria where they are concentrated in the Shinehen River area. Khamnigans who followed the emigrant Buryats to the Shinehen basin, are commonly bilingual in Buryat, and have now largely replaed their Kharnnigan Mongol language by the Eastern Buryat language of the Buryats. Buryat has also been adopted as the main language of local intercultural communication by remnants of the Russians who moved to western Manchuria after the October Revolution. J anhunen points out that Oirat Mongolian was the dominant language of the Jungarian (Dzungarian) Empire (approximately 1676-1757) in Dzungaria in northern Xinjiang (Sinkiang). It is still important today as lingua franca and the second language of mostly Turkic speaking groups in northern Xinjiang. A small group of the Turkic Khakas (formerly Yenisei Kirghiz) moved over to the northern part of Jungaria in 1703. After the Manchu Qing dynasty defeated Jungaria and annexed it to China in 1759, it transferred a part of the Jungaria population to the Nonni basin in Manchuria. These transferred people were mainly Oirat OlOts from the leading Oirat-speaking tribe of the Jungars, and a group of the Yenisei Kirghiz was also included with them. Both Oirat (OlOt) and Khakas (the present name for Yenisei Kirghiz), with Oirat (OlOt) the main community language and the Khakas bilingual in it, are still spoken there today, though both languages are on

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese

the way out now as a result of dominance by the Chinese language. The last speakers of Khakas are also fluent in Dagur in addition to being bilingual in Oirat (OlOt). lanhunen mentions that Mongolian proper in China has a standard written form based on earlier classical Mongolian, and used as an official language all over Inner Mongolia, including the western part of Manchuria. This language has become an additional language of speakers of other languages in northwestern Manchuria such as Dagur, Khamnigan (Mongol), Buryat and Evenki. At the same time, the Khorchin dialect of oral Mongolian proper in China has influenced Khamnigan (Mongol) and the so-called Old Bargut which with the so-called New Bargut constituted originally two forms of Buryat. Both of them have today lost most of their Buryat features to Mongolian proper. With a small group of speakers of Evenki proper in far northern Manchuria, Russian used to be the main medium of intercultural communication until recently, whereas with the Oroqen, a larger group of Evenkis in the extreme northeast of Manchuria, Dagur is the language of intercultural communication, though formerly it was also Manchu. There is a large population of Koreans in eastern Manchuria. Their language of intercultural communication is Chinese.

Gansu and Qinghai area Another area of northern China in which there is a complex pattern of intercultural communication involving languages other than Chinese, is Gansu and the adjacent part of Qinghai. In this general area, there are four small and one large Mongolic languages (Dongxiang or Santa, Bao'an, Monguor or Tu, Eastern (Yellow) Yugur, as well as Oirat), three Turkic languages (Salar, Western (Yellow) Uighur-both close to Uighur-and Uighur itself), three hybrid languages (Hezhou, Tangwang and Wutun) and Tibetan (the Rongmahbrogpa vernacular of the Amdo dialect). The small Mongolic languages have been subject to quite considerable Tibetan and Chinese

817

influence, with the former manifesting itself mainly on the structural and grammatical level, and the latter more on the lexical, except that Dongxiang syllable structure has changed from Mongolic to Chinese to a considerable extent (Field 1994) and Chinese influence is strongly present in some structural features of Bao'an (Li 1983). An interesting feature of the small Mongolic languages is the presence of a singular-restricted plural-plural distinction with nouns in Bao'an and Monguor and to some extent in Dongxiang. In Bao'an and Dongxiang the plural marker is -la, clearly a borrowing from Turkic -lar - -ler, more specifically from Salar and Uighur -lao The singular marker in Bao'an and Monguor is -( .g)ge - -ge obviously reflecting nege 'one' in both languages, though it is very likely that the existence of a singular marker is attributable to the influence of the Chinese classifier -ge which appears in both languages in Chinese loans and was mistaken by the speakers of the Mongolic languages as indicating singularity for which the Mongolic word nege 'one' was a readily available similar marker. The restricted plural marker, in Bao'an -tjula and Dongxiang -si"la is likely to be derived from Chinese ji (dji) 'a few' with the Bao'an and Dongxiang plural suffix -la added to it. Tibetan grammatical influence manifests itself especially in Bao'an and Monguor in the marking of the subject on the verb in which, as in Tibetan, only speaker and non-speaker (i.e. person addressed or spoken about) are distinguished. Similarly, the Tibetan characteristic of indicating whether a statement is objective, i.e. a generally known fact, or subjective, i.e. only reflecting the speaker's opinion, is mirrored in the structure of Bao'an (Chen 1989: 29). Chinese lexical influence is very strong and amounts to 50%-55% of Chinese loans in Bao'an for instance (Li 1983). In the western, Tongren, of the two Bao'an speech communities, Tibetan lexical influence is quite pronounced. The three hybrid languages in the area, as described in Lee Smith's and Wurm's texts in this Atlas, are of particular interest. One of them is

818

S.A. Wurm

Hezhou, a creolized language spoken by a relatively small population in and around the Linxia Autonomous Region in Gansu and it is also a trade lingua franca in the Dongxiang, Salar and Eastern Bao'an areas, and also in the adjacent Tibetan areas to the west, which according to Lee Smith reflects Altaic, in particular Turkic (apparently Salar and Uighur), characteristics in its structure, whereas its lexicon is largely Chinese-based. However, there are only three tones, and they seem to be non-semantic. It is unclear whether the Chinese words are losing their tones or whether the probably originally Turkic speakers of the language were not very successfully struggling with Chinese tones, which seems more likely. The thought patterns underlying the syntactic features and structural patterns of Hezhou are clearly Turkic, as manifested in word order, and the manner in which Turkic nominal and verbal inflection is mirrored in Hezhou. Four of the Hezhou casesuffixes show formal, in addition to functional, similarity with Turkic, especially Uighur, case suffixes. There is a total of six cases in Hezhou, one of them with a zero marker in both Hezhou and Uighur. Of the remaining five, the suffixes are clearly based on Turkic suffixes in two; in the third case the suffix has two forms, one for humans and one for other entities, the first of which seems to be based on a Turkic + a Tibetan suffix and the second on a Turkic suffix; the fourth case suffix seems to be also based on a Turkic + a Tibetan suffix; and the fifth on a Chinese element which is used as a suffix. The personal pronominal system is basically Chinese, and the forms of the personal pronouns are also based on Chinese, but the pronouns take case suffixes in Hezhou, just like the nouns. The lack of verbal inflection in the Chinese elements in Hezhou is compensated for by the utilization of Chinese-looking suffixes to express typically Turkic grammatical functions, e.g. those of the con verbs (gerund-type verb forms indicating successive, simultaneous and other sequential actions) and verbal nouns which are both universally found in Turkic and other Altaic languages. Of verb markers, some may be

mentioned: there is a tense marker which generally indicates a past potentially continuing into the future in the consequences of the past action. It is based on a Chinese element. There is an intention marker based on a Chinese-looking element, a negative marker derived from a Chinese element, a set of necessitative markers based on Chinese elements divested from their Chinese meanings and functions, and a verbal noun formed by a Chinese element used as a suffix. Of converbs, one is formed by a Chinese-looking syllable used as a suffix and generally denoting successive actions. Another con verb denotes strong intention. It is based on a form derived from a Chinese verb. Some of the attempts at mirroring the complex Uighur grammatical features are very rudimentary, much more so than for instance in Tangwang (see below). Hezhou apparently developed as a simplified trade or intercultural communication language between speakers of an originally Turkic (Salar and/or Uighur) language and Chinese speakers, with the Turkic speakers attempting to absorb as much as possible of Chinese vocabulary, but keeping much of the general grammatical principles of the Turkic language in their speech, expressing them in part through Turkic elements, and in part through utilizing Chinese-looking suffixes, divorced from any Chinese meanings and/or functions, to express typically Turkic grammatical functions. The linguistic, though not sociolinguistic, processes described here as leading to the development of Hezhou, are reminiscent of what has resulted in the emergence of for instance New Guinea Pidgin (Tok Pisin) which is discussed elsewhere in this Atlas, i.e. the utilization of a large part of vocabulary derived from English, the preservation of structural features reflecting Southwestern Pacific Austronesian patterns, and the adoption of English lexical elements divested from their English meanings and syntactic functions to express typically Southwestern Pacific Austronesian grammatical features. Hezhou, as a stabilized hybrid idiom of intercultural communication became creolized at

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese

some stage in the past, but continued to be used as a fairly widespread lingua franca and trade language in the Dongxiang, Salar and adjacent Tibetan and Chinese areas until the present day. Another creolized hybrid language in the same general area, Tangwang, is spoken by about 20,000 people in about a dozen villages located in the northeastern corner of the Dongxiang Autonomous County in Gansu. Lee Smith points out that it combines lexical and phonetic features of a form of Mandarin Chinese with grammatical features of the small Mongolian language Dongxiang, which itself shows strong Chinese lexical influence and some influence from Tibetan and Turkic. Phonetically, Tangwang is similar to Putonghua (Mandarin) and has four tones, though two of them are in the process of merging, and quite numerous grammatical elements the majority of which are formally and lexically Chinese, but function in quite different Dongxiang grammatical roles, are toneless. By way of contrast, tones are given to the large number of loanwords from nontonal languages in Tangwang, such as Arabic, Persian (the speakers are Muslims), and Donxiang. The values of the four (or three) tones in Tangwang are different from those of the same tone categories in Mandarin. Grammatically, Tangwang is patterned on Dongxiang, much more elaborately so than the mostly rather rudimentary grammatical patterning of Hezhou on Turkic (Salar/uighur), especially in the verb structure. There is only a singular-plural distinction with nouns, no restricted plural as present in Dongxiang, and the Tangwang plural suffix is derived from the Chinese human plural particle, but functions as a general plural marker. There are four case markers with nouns as opposed to eight in Dongxiang, with three of them based on Dongxiang case suffixes, and one on a Turkic case suffix. The pronominal system of Tangwang is patterned on the Dongxiang system, but the pronominal bases are derived from Chinese. They take the same case suffixes as the nouns. There is a reflexive possessive marker ('one's own') in Tangwang which is the same as in Dongxiang and a Dongxiang marker for possession by a third person. As in Dongxiang, a

819

formal distinction is made between a third person's possession by himself or herself, and possession by another third person (i.e. 'his own' as opposed to 'his': 'someone else's). In the verb, basic (active) and causative (or passive) voice are distinguished. There are four aspects of which two are indicated by suffixes based on Dongxiang forms, and two on formally Chinese, but functionally Dongxiang, suffixes. Verbal nouns are formed by Chinese-looking, but functionally Dongxiang, suffixes. There are six converbs, one of them with two different semantic functions denoted by different stress patterns. Five of these converbs, including the one with the double function, are marked by suffixes derived from Dongxiang converb suffixes, and the sixth has a zero suffix, while Dongxiang has a specific suffix for this converb. The functions of the six converbs are identical in both languages. The Tangwang word order is generally SOV (subjectverb-object), though there is some flexibility. Lee Smith mentions that it seems very likely that Tangwang was originally a Mandarin Chinese dialect. For some reason, its speakers, either as exiles or escaping famine, etc. found themselves in a region where they were in close contact with Altaic, especially speakers of Dongxiang Mongolian. It is very probable that a considerable amount of intermarriage between Chinesespeaking males and Dongxiang women took place which led to the gradual, though incomplete, shifting of the structure of the language spoken by the children from Chinese to Dongxiang, while the fathers (and mothers in mixed marriages where the mother was Tangwang) hung on to their Chinese vocabulary, together with their tones, in a tenacious cultural attempt to maintain their cultural identity, and successfully induced and persuaded their offspring to do the same, though they were losing control over the structural side of their language which now approximates Dongxiang, resulting in the Chinese-Dongxiang hybrid nature of Tangwang. This scenario and development is quite similar to what has seemingly happened to Ejnu, a Persian-Uighur hybrid language in western Xinjiang (see below),

820

S.A. Wurm

except that with Ejnu the shift to Uighur structure has become complete, and Uighur phonetic influence in the very largely Persian vocabulary is very strong indeed. Another creolized hybrid language of the same area is Wutun, spoken by about 2,000 people in two villages situated on the left bank of the Rongwo River in the Tongren County in Qinghai. The language is a hybrid of Chinese, Tibetan and Mongolian (in particular Bao'an Mongolian and to some extent Monguor). The greatest number of lexical elements is derived from Chinese (the majority of these have undergone considerable formal and semantic changes, and have no tones) a smaller proportion consists of lexical elements derived from Tibetan (the Rongmahbrogpa vernacular of the Amdo dialect), and an even smaller proportion is from Mongolian (mainly Bao' an). There is also a portion of the vocabulary which consists of compounds of Chinese and Tibetan parts, or of Tibetan bases with Wutun formative suffixes, etc. The structure of the language is essentially Altaic, mirroring Bao'an to a great extent, but Tibetan influence is strongly present, especially in some aspects of expression. The grammatical function elements are predominantly derived from Bao' an, to a lesser extent from Tibetan, and a few from Chinese. A number of the latter seem to be artificially created (as is the case in Hezhou) or divested from their Chinese meanings and functions (as is the case in Tangwang) to express concepts which in Bao'an and Tibetan are expressed by grammatical means not available in Wutun structure. The personal pronominal system is very largely Tibetan. The lack of tones with the Chinese lexical elements is clearly attributable to the fact that the other languages which have contributed to the emergence ofWutun, Amdo Tibetan and Bao'an, are toneless. Lee Smith and Wurm mention that there are indications that tone patterns have been replaced by stress patterns, i.e. the speakers of non-tonal languages who were learning the Chinese part of the language heard and interpreted the tones as stress phenomena.

The word order in Wutun follows Bao'an Mongolian principles. It is SOY (subject-objectverb) and determining words (i.e. numerals, adjectives, etc.) precede the words which they determine, though a few rare instances of Tibetan word order occur, with determining words following the determined ones. Word formation, through suffixes, is strictly Mongolic, with for instance suffixes added to nouns to form verbs, etc. The concept of a singular-restricted pluralplural distinction as described above for the small Mongolic languages Bao'an, Monguor and to some extent Dongxiang, appears also in Wutun, with the singUlar marker as -ke < Bao'an -ge, the restricted plural marker as -t(;ik~ < Chinese jige 'several', and the plural marker t~r;) - -tum which probably reflects the common Turkic plural suffix -let - -Lar. There are ten cases in Wutun, three indicated by suffixes borrowed from Altaic (Mongolic and Turkic) languages, two by markers of Tibetan origin, and two by markers derived from Chinese lexical elements which are used as suffixes. Three of the cases are unique to Wutun, with specialized directional and distributive functions indicated by suffixes of unknown origin. It is interesting to note that the functions of the suffixes indicating direct and indirect object (direct object -xa and indirect object -na) in Wutun are reversed when comparing the appearance of formally similar suffixes in neighbouring languages. So, for instance, Bao'an has -ne and Dongxiang -ni for the direct object, Turkic languages have - ya, -xa for the indirect object and -ni for the direct object, Xezhou and Tangwang both have only -xa, for the direct and indirect object alike. The personal pronouns are Tibetan, except for the Chinese base forms of the second person pronouns and some Chinese elements added to pronouns as suffixes. Case suffixes are added to pronouns, though there are special forms such as second person singular pronoun object forms. As in the other hybrid languages of the GansuQinghai areas, the person of the subject is not marked by verb suffixes while this is the case in Bao'an and Tibetan. The verb inflection is other-

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese

wise quite complex, more so than in Tangwang, with the various markers predominantly based on Bao'an and to a lesser extent on Tibetan markers. Some of them are derived from Chinese elements, some are of unknown origin, and some others appear to have been artificially created. Some verb forms can be quite complicated. There is a causative/passive form with a Mongolic marker and a reciprocal form with a suffix of unknown origin. Of tenses, there is a future and a general present, both with Bao'an suffixes, and a past indicated by a suffix based on a Chinese element. A completed aspect is indicated by a suffix based on a Chinese element, and a necessitative by a marker of unknown origin. There is a negative marker from Tibetan, and a future negative and a prohibitive indicated by markers based on Chinese elements. An interrogative suffix occurs, derived from a Chinese element, and a definiteness and a certainty suffix of unknown origin. A voluntative (first person imperative, 'let me .. .', 'let us .. .') suffix is present; so is a suffix indicating a request addressed to a second person, and another denoting permission for a third person ('let him') to carry out an action. All three are based on Bao'an forms, with the second a Tibetan loan in Bao'an. There is a hortative marker indicating encouragement addressed to a second person, based on Tibetan-it always follows a verbal noun. An uncertainty or conjecture marker, based on a Chinese element, is found. It can be followed by a special emphasizing suffix of unknown origin. Verbal nouns are very frequently used. They are formed by a suffix derived from Chinese, and often replace straight verb forms, e.g. 'I drink' = 'I a-drinking-one am'. The nominalizing suffix -g:1 is frequently added to Wutun verbal nouns. A very important feature of Wutun, based on Tibetan usage, though also present in Bao'an and Monguor under Tibetan influence, is the distinction between the subjective or objective nature of a statement. 'Subjective' indicates that the statement reflects the speakers own personal opinion only, e.g. '(I think) this man is sick', whereas 'objective' denotes that the statement reflects a generally known fact, i.e. 'this man is sick (as we all know)'. In Tibetan, Bao'an

821

and Monguor this distinction is indicated by means of verbal inflection, whereas in Wutun it is marked by the use of two different suffixes, both of them probably artificially coined. There are seven converbs in Wutun, four of them marked by suffixes directly based on Bao'an converb suffixes, two are derived from Bao'an converb suffixes, one of them through reduplication and one through truncation, and one is formed through the reduplication of the last mentioned truncated converb marker. Only with two of the Wutun con verb suffixes which are directly based on Bao'an converb suffixes, are the meanings and functions identical in the two languages. With the other two Wutun converbs whose suffixes are directly derived from Bao'an converb suffixes, one has a meaning and function which is the opposite of what it has in Bao'an (Wutun: simultaneity; Bao'an: successivity), and the other is also different (Wutun: condition, already happened, i.e. 'if ... then', 'as ... therefore'; Bao'an: 'as long as', 'until'). With the remaining three which are essentially Wutun creations on the basis of Bao'an forms, the meanings and functions of the Wutun con verbs are different from those of the Bao' an con verbs on which they are based. Lee Smith and Wurm mention that there are several theories concerning the origins of the people who today speak Wutun of whom historical documents indicate that they were already living in the Wutun area in 1585. It seems that at least a part of their ancestors may have been Moslem Chinese speakers from the Nanjing area. This seems to be indicated by Chen Nanxiong (1988) who states that Wutun syllables of Chinese origin have a vowel distribution resembling that of the old Nanjing dialect. The oral tradition of the Wutun also claims that they were Chinese Moslems immigrating from the city of Nanjing and Sichuan province centuries ago (Li 1983: 32). It seems possible that they might have originally migrated from Nanjing to Sichuan where they failed to settle, and might later have further migrated to the Wutun area, perhaps together with people from Sichuan who may not have been Chinese. They converted to Lamaism and seemed

822

S.A. Wurm

to have sought refuge and association with the Lamaist Bao'an Mongolians, perhaps as a protection against oppression by the Tibetans. While this may have led to intermarriage, it appears that the effect of this upon the development of the language has been different from what can be assumed to have happened in the case of Ejnu and Tangwang. It may be suggested that intermarriage in the Wutun situation may have taken a different direction, with a larger proportion of intermarriage between Bao'an men and Wutun women, with the latter learning the Bao' an language with a considerable range of misunderstandings, novel grammatical creations and distortions, and passing on this language to their offspring with whom it became stabilized, while at the same time their husbands acquired some of their wives' Chinese vocabulary in a rudimentary and distorted fashion. The use of this new language of communication in trading activities between the Bao'an and the Wutun, with the originally Moslem Wutun probably being accomplished traders like many other Chinese Moslems, may have well contributed to stabilizing the Wutun language in this form. With Tibetan being the local lingua franca in the area, and the language of the Lamaist religion, it exercised an additional strong influence upon Wutun, as it had upon Bao'an (and Monguor, etc.). The fact that the Persian and the Chinese lexical element has been well preserved in Ejnu and Tangwang, while it has suffered badly in Wutun, may be attributable to the Wutun being originally Moslems, with Chinese perhaps not even their original language, and in any event, Chinese apparently not having been a symbol of their cultural identity. Therefore, the Wutun seem to have lacked the motivation of the Ejnu and Tangwang to attempt to preserve their original vocabulary with the same cultural tenacity as the latter two. It may be mentioned in this that the Wutun do not know Chinese, but virtually all of them speak, and some of them read and write, Tibetan, and regard themselves as Tibetans. The following may be said about the intercultural communication situation at present and in the

recent past involving the local languages mentioned for the Gansu-Qinghai area: The use of Hezhou as trade and other lingua franca in the Dongxiang, Salar, and adjacent Tibetan and Chinese aras has already been mentioned. The Dongxiang are said (BeffaHamayon 1983: 135) otherwise to be very concerned to use their own language only in all situations. (though some may know Tibetan). The eastern (Moslem) Bao'an understand Dongxiang and Chinese and probably know some Salar, whereas the western (Lamaist) Bao'an know Tibetan. The Tangwang do not speak Dongxiang, but know Tibetan. The Oirat Mongols in the eastern and southern enclaves in the Tibetan speaking area know Tibetan, as do those in the western enclave, especially in the Oirat-Tibetan mixed population area where Tibetans also speak some Oirat Mongolian. Amongst the Monguor who are Lamaists, some know Tibetan or Chinese, but the majority only speak their own language (Beffa-Hamayon 1983: 136). Among the Mongolian Eastern (yellow) Yugur and the Turkic-speaking Western (yellow) Yugur who live adjacent to each other, some are bilingual in the two languages which they then use for communication between them, but otherwise speakers of the two Yugur languages use Chinese for intercommunication. Speakers of Eastern Yugur have a passive knowledge of standard Mongolian based on two-way passive bilingualism. This is hampered to some extent by a large number of Turkic loans in Eastern Yugur from Western Yugur which is closely related to Uighur. Speakers of both Yugur languages who live close to Tibetans know Tibetan. In the northwestern part of Gansu, there is passive bilingualism between neighbouring speakers of Uighur and Kazakh. Xinjiang (Sinkiang)

The third area in northern China in which there are complex situations of non-Chinese languages involved in intercultural communication is Xinjiang (Sinkiang). In this area, there are six Turkic languages (Uighur, Kazakh, Kirghiz,

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese

Uzbek, Tatar and Tuva), two Mongolian languages (Oirat and Dagur), two ManchuTungusic languages (Xibo or Sibe, a dialect of Manchu, and Oroqen), Tibetan, three IndoEuropean languages (Russian and the two Pamir Iranian languages Wakhi and Sarikoli), and one hybrid language (Ejnu, a Persian-Uighur hybrid language). The Turkic languages are all closely interrelated, and acquired passive bilingualism is a common feature in adjacent Turkic-speaking areas, especially so between Uighur, Uzbek and Tatar, but also prevalent between Uighur and Kazakh, and Uighur and Kirghiz, though there are some difficulties which can however be readily overcome by some experience in communication. Active bilingualism between speakers of different Turkic languages, involving especially Uighur and Kazakh, is common in the Bortala area (see below). Tuva stands further apart, though passive bilingualism for communication with their Kazakh neighbours can be acquired without much difficulty. The small Mongolian Dagur and Manchu-Tungusic populations in the Hi basin in the Bortala area in northwestern Xinjang intercommunicate in Dagur (according to Janhunen, the Oroqen there have been reduced to a single bilingual individual by now). Intercommunication between the Dagur and other surrounding people is served by the general multilingualism in the Bortala area (see below). According to Janhunen, the Dagurs and Oroqens had been moved by the Qing government from the Amur river area to the IIi basin in western Xinjiang in 1763. The Oirat Mongolian language is an important lingua franca in northern Xinjiang and in the Bortala region (see below). Especially in areas with Oirat-Kazakh and Oirat-Uighur mixed population, there is considerable active bilingualism in the respective two languages. Speakers of the Pamir languages Wakhi and Sarikoli in the extreme western part of Xinjiang can communicate with each other through passive bilingualism in their respective languages because of their close interrelationship. They and their languages are referred to in China as Tajik which is the name of an important Iranian language, very closely related to Persian, in Tajikistan to the

823

west, but not closely related to the Iranian Pamir languages such as Wakhi and Sarikoli. The hybrid language Ejnu is spoken by a scattered group of several thousand people in the far western part of Xinjiang in the area between Kashgar (Kashi) and Khotan (Hotan) and also eastwards beyond Aksu. The language is structurally and phonetically Turkic Uighur. Uighur vowel-harmony and consonant assimilation operates fully in Ejnu, and the Uighur phonetic system applies to all words, including those of Persian origin. The lexical elements of Ejnu are predominantly Persian or Persianderived, though many of them have been petrified or simplified. There is a large proportion of Arabic lexical elements in Ejnu which are however also part of standard Persian. In addition, there are loanwords from several other languages. For instance, the personal pronouns are almost entirely from Uighur, and there are some other Uighur loanwords, also loanwords from Mongolian, Manchu, and some words of uncertain origin, as well as metaphoric expressions. The Ejnu regard themselves as being of Persian descent. It seems likely that their ancestors were first Persian Shiites who came to Central Asia in the 8th century AD (Grenard 1898: 309-310) and later Persian traders who stayed behind in Xinjiang after the cessation of trading on the Silk Routes in the seventeenth century and intermarried with Uighur women from whom their children learnt UighUr. However, the Persian fathers who had maintained a strong feeling of ethnic identity which has continued until today, insisted that their children used words from their original language, Persian, which led to the development of this hybrid language. The Ejnu speakers are all bilingual in Uighur which they use as a lingua franca to outsiders. The language situation in the Bortala area in the northwestern comer of Xinjiang is particularly interesting. More than half the population are mostly monolingual Chinese, and most of the remainder are speakers of Uighur, Kazakh and Oirat Mongol in descending numbers, with the

824

S.A. Wurm

speakers of the Manchu-Tungusic Xibo (Sibe) being the numerically smallest speech community. The official languages in Bortala are Chinese and Oirat Mongolian, but Uighur and Kazakh are also widely spoken, with multilingualism in these four languages widespread among the non-Chinese population. The use of these languages is governed by sociolinguistic factors as mentioned by Lee Smith in the Atlas text Multilingualism in Bortala. In spite of the large Chinese population in Bortala, Chinese has not become the lingua franca of the area, but there are four parallel languages of intercultural communication. If anything, Uighur is the most important lingua franca among the non-Chinese groups. It is also used by the Xibo speakers, along with Kazakh and Oirat Mongolian. The Xibo language does not appear to be used by outsiders, except perhaps by some in the Xibo-Uighur mixed population area south of Yining. The Dagur who are located at the southern

fringe of Bortala in the neighbourhood of Kazakh and Uighur speakers, use these languages as lingue franche, with probably being familiar with Oirat Mongol which is, though not very closely, related to their language. They are thus partaking in the general multilingualism of the Bortala area. In addition to what has been said, it may be mentioned that Mandarin Chinese (putonghua) is steadily increasing its role as universal lingua franca in most areas of northern China. Intercommunication between Chinese speakers of different dialect backgrounds is, in addition, served often by passive or active bidialectalism or bilingualism. Most of the Chinese dialects in northern China are Mandarin dialects, and because of their relative closeness to each other, intercommunication between speakers of diverse dialects through acquired passive or active bidialectalism or bilingualism presents relatively few problems there.

References Beffa, Marie-Lise-Roberte Hamayon 1983 "Le langues mongoles", Etudes mongoles et siberiennes, cahier 14: 121-169. Chen, Naixiong 1988 "Wutun hua yinxi", [The phonetics of the Wutun vernacular]. Minzu Yuwen 3: 1-10. 1989 "Wutun hua de dongcu xing tai", [Morphology of verbs of the Wutun vernacular]. Minzu Yuwen 6: 26-37. Field, Kenneth L. 1994 "A comparative analysis of the syllable structures and syllable inventories of Dongxiang and Hui: the effects of contact", University of California, Santa Barbara, Papers No.5: 14-36. Grenard, F. 1898 Le Turkestan et Ie Tibet. Second Part of J.-L. Dutreuil de Rhins, Mission scientifique

dans la Haute Asie 1890-1895. Appendice: Races particulieres du Turkestan Chinois: 303315. Paris: Ernest Leroux. Li, Charles N. 1983 "Languages in contact in Western China", Papers in East Asian languages 1: 3151. Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures, University of Hawaii. Todayeva, B .Kh. 1961 Dung' anskij jazyk [The Dongxiang language]. Moscow: Oriental Literature Publishers. 1964 Baoan' skij jazyk [The Bao' an language]. Moscow: Nauka Publishers.

North China: Intercultural communication involving indigenous languages other than Chinese

Relevant map North China intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm. Map 95.

825

Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria Juha J anhunen The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Northern Manchuria as a geographical region is conveniently defined as identical with the hydrological province of the river Amur (Chinese Heilong Jiang), with its sources and tributaries. The core of this region, delimited by the Argun (Chinese Eerguna) in the west, the Upper and Middle Amur in the north, and the Ussuri (Chinese Wusuli) in the east, belongs today to China, while the other side of the border is controlled by Russia. In the modern administrative division of China, Northern Manchuria is considered as the northern part of what is officially termed the Chinese Northeast (Chinese Dongbei). A further administrative division runs along the river Nonni (Chinese Nen Jiang), which separates the regular Amur Province (Chinese Heilong Jiang Sheng) in the east from the Inner Mongolian league (aimak) of Hulun Buir (Chinese Hulun Beier Meng) in the west. From the cultural point of view, Northern Manchuria may be viewed as a transition between three regions: (Southern) Manchuria in the south, Siberia in the north and northwest, and Mongolia in the west and southwest. During the whole period of recorded history, the indigenous population of Northern Manchuria has typically spoken languages of the Mongolic and Tungusic groups, though the basin of the Lower Amur in the extreme northeast of the region has also had speakers of the 'Palaeo-Siberian' Nivkh (Ghilyak) language. The idiom of political prestige all over the region may have been a type of Mongolic as early as the mediaeval Liao (916-1125) dynasty of the Khitans (Chinese Qidan), and it was certainly so during the Yuan dynasty (1271-1368) of the Mongols proper. On the other hand, the Southern Tungusic Jurchen-Manchu language played the dominant role during the Jin dynasty (1115-1234)

of the Jurchens (Chinese Nuzhen) as well as during the Qing dynasty (1644-1911) of the Manchus. Towards the end of the Qing dynasty, Northern Manchuria became an object of colonial rivalry between Russia and Japan, a development which ultimately resulted in the increase of Han Chinese immigration to the region. The expansion of Chinese (Mandarin) rapidly led to the decline of Manchu as a spoken language, but at the local level several other indigenous languages continue to be used until the present day. In spite of the leading role taken by Chinese in the intercultural communication between the nationalities of modern China, especially after the decade of active Sinicization during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), the local languages are also organized in a number of hierarchical bi- and multilingual relationships in which certain idioms dominate over others. The following discussion is focussed on the intercultural functions of five Mongolic languages in Northern Manchuria: Dagur, Khamnigan, Buryat, Oirat, and Mongolian proper. Dagur By some considered to be the immediate descendant of the Khitan language, Dagur is, in any case, among the most aberrant modern Mongolic languages as far as both its grammar and lexicon are concerned. In an areal context, the peculiarities of Dagur can be explained by the fact that it was always spoken in the extreme northeastern periphery of the Mongolic language area. This peripheral position not only favoured the preservation of a number of significant archaisms absent in most other modern Mongolic languages, but it also led to a symbiotic relationship with the

828

luha lanhunen

Tungusic languages spoken in the neighbourhood. During the historical Manchu dominance in Manchuria many Dagur individuals used to be bilingual in Manchu, and modem Dagur may still be said to possess a Manchu superstrate. At a more local level, Dagur itself became the second language of a special Tungusic group, the Solons. At the time of the first Sino-Russian border conflict in the Amur region, in the early years of the Qing dynasty, the Dagur speech community is known to have been living along the course of the Upper Amur and its tributaries, notably in the Zeya basin in what is today the Amur Region (Russian Amurskaya Oblast') of the Russian Far East. As the Dagurs adhered to a Manchu type of economy with small-scale agriculture and animal husbandry as the main sources of subsistence, the Solons originally belonged to the local forestoriented hunters and reindeer breeders who spoke dialects of the Northern Tungusic Evenki language. Gradually, however, the Solons became increasingly closely associated with the Dagurs, to whom they ultimately came to form a satellite group. Though preserving Evenki as their first language, the Solons developed massive bilingualism in Dagur. Not surprisingly, the type of Evenki spoken by the Solons became strongly influenced by Dagur, while, at the same time, the Dagur language received an almost equally strong impact of Evenki ad strate influence. The subsequent fate of the Solons has been inseparably connected with the Dagurs. Soon after the arrival of the Russians on the Amur, the Qing government moved the bulk of the Dagur speech community to the Nonni basin (1654). Later, parts of the Dagur-speaking population were further transferred to the Hailar (Chinese Hailaer) basin in central Hulun Buir (1732) as well as to the remote IIi (Chinese YilO basin in Sinkiang (Chinese Xinjiang) (1763). The Solons were automatically included in all these transfers, and we may, therefore, speak of four areal groups of both the Dagurs and the Solons: the Amur group, the Nonni group, the Hailar group, and the Sinkiang group. Within all these groups, the Solon population has until modem times been characterized by widespread bilingualism in Dagur.

In the official ethnic taxonomy of China, the Dagurs (Chinese Dawoer) are today recognized as a separate nationality, while the Solons (Chinese Suolun) form the main division of the Evenki (Chinese Ewenke) nationality. No statistical information is available concerning the first and second language proficiencies of these groups, but it would seem likely that the majority of both the Dagurs (ca. 100,000 individuals) and the Solons (ca. 20,000 individuals) still speak their proper languages, while perhaps one half of the Solons know Dagur as a second language. There are, however, clear regional differences. The Evenki-speaking population among the Sinkiang Solons, also known as the Ongkor Solons, has by the present day (1991) diminished down to a single individual, bilingual in Dagur, while both Dagur and Evenki have long been losing ground in the Amur basin due to the massive invasion of Russian (on the Russian side) and Han Chinese (on the Chinese side) immigrants and administrators. The largest concentration of native Dagurspeakers (ca. 25,000 individuals) lives today in the Nonni region within the 'autonomous' Morin Dabaa (Chinese Moli Dawa) Dagur Banner of Hulun Buir. This group forms the basis for the bilingualism of several small Solon communities in the neighbouring counties of Nehe and Nenjiang of the Amur Province. However, the overwhelming majority (more than 90%) of the modern population in the whole of the Nonni basin consists of Han Chinese immigrants, which severely diminishes the future prospects of Dagur as an intercultural idiom in the region. Linguistic assimilation is particularly seriously threatening the existence of the Dagur and Solon communities in the vicinity of the city of Tsitsikar (Chinese Qiqihaer). The situation is more favourable in the Hailar region, where the 'autonomous' Evenki Banner in the composition of Hulun Buir has small but vigorous populations of linguistically unassimilated Solons (ca. 8,000 individuals) and Dagurs (ca. 14,000 individuals). In spite of the inevitably growing importance of Chinese, Dagur preserves a living function as a medium of

Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria

interethnic communication in the region. Dagur speech is conspicuously present even in the Chinese-dominated administrative centre of the banner, and it is used not only by the local Solons, but also, occasionally, by representatives of other minority groups. Although most of the Dagurs and Solons are fluent in Chinese, as well, there seems to be no imminent danger of linguistic assimilation here. Khamnigan Kharnnigan is another archaic Mongolic language in the northeastern periphery of the Mongolic language area. Probably originally spoken in the territory extending from the Argun in the east to the Onon in the west, Kharnnigan acquired many of its peculiar features under a strong influence of the Evenki dialects spoken in the region. Ultimately, there emerged two dialectal varieties of Khamnigan (Khamnigan Mongol) and two varieties of Evenki (Khamnigan Evenki), all of which were interconnected in a complex network of bilingual relationships. The bilingual population in question is historically known as the 'Equestrian Tungus' (Russian konnye tunguzy) of Transbaikalia, but in a more modem terminology we may properly speak of the Khamnigans (Russian xamnigany). Ethnogenetically the Khamnigans seem to have been formed of Mongolic and Tungusic components in a roughly equal proportion, a situation that is also reflected by the mixed character of their traditional cultural patterns. Like the Dagurs, the Khamnigans were seriously affected by the formation of the SinoRussian border, but unlike the Dagurs, they took the Russian side in the political conflict. However, although the Kharnnigan native territory was officially given to Russia by the agreement of Nerchinsk (1689), the colonization of the region by Russian cossacks led to the emigration of a group of Kharnnigans over the state border to the Mongolian part of the Onon basin. Following the October Revolution (1917) another wave of emigration took place, in that the Khamnigans living in the Argun basin crossed the river from

829

Russia to China. Today we have, therefore, three separate groups of Khamnigans, living, correspondingly, in the Chita Region (Russian citinskaja oblast') of Russian Transbaikalia, the Khentei League (Mongolian Kentei Aimaq) of Mongolia, as well as the Hulun Buir League of Inner Mongolia, China. Apparently due to their small overall population (probably no more than ca. 5,000 individuals), and possibly also because of the scarcity of information concerning the linguistic situation among them, the Khamnigans are not officially recognized as a distinct ethnic group in any of the three political states within which they live today. In Russia they are counted as a subgroup of the Buryats and in Mongolia as one of the Mongols proper, while in China they are included, like the Solons, within the Evenki nationality. These differences in the taxonomic status of the Khamnigans probably also reflect differences in their modem state of preservation, for it seems that the Russian Khamnigans have by the present day almost completely gone over to use Buryat and Russian as their main languages, while the Mongolian Khamnigans may have become assimilated by the Khalkha-speaking majority of the country. The only vigorous group of linguistically unassimilated Khamnigans lives, therefore, in Hulun Buir. The Khamnigans of Hulun Buir are today concentrated in the 'autonomous' Evenki District (sumun) of the Old Bargut Banner (Chinese Chen Baerhu Qi), located in the basin of the river Mergel (Chinese Moergele), where they form the absolute majority of the local population (ca. 1,300 out of ca. 2,200 individuals). Under such fortunate circumstances, the Khamnigans have been able to preserve not only the Mongolic Khamnigan language (one of the two dialectal varieties), but also the special type of Evenki traditionally characteristic of the Khamnigans. The current situation is that Khamnigan (Khamnigan Mongol) serves as the community language for all the Khamnigans in the Mergel region, while it is also the first and only indigenous language of about one third of them. The remaining two thirds of the Khamnigans speak Evenki (two separate

830

luha lanhunen

dialectal varieties of Khamnigan Evenki) as a home and family language. It is, consequently, possible to view Kharnnigan (Kharnnigan Mongol) as the dominant medium of communication between those individuals for whom it is the only native language and those who also speak Evenki. The peculiarity in the Kharnnigan situation is that both idioms are transmitted as parallel native languages within a single community. Speaking of a first and a second language in the case of bilingual Khamnigans would appear irrelevant, for the basis for the knowledge of both languages is formed simultaneously in early childhood. From the point of view of a general ethnolinguistic classification, the Mongolic language is the more important of the two, for it is the distinctive idiom spoken by all of the Khamnigans, and only by them. Evenki, by contrast, is a language also used by many other groups (though in other dialectal varieties). The main difference between the SolonDagur and the Kharnnigan types of bilingualism is that the Khamnigans almost totally lack individuals monolingual in Evenki. In view of the already dominant role of the Mongolic language among the Khamnigans in Hulun Buir, it would seem likely that bilingualism in Evenki may lose ground in the future. In the long run, the Mongolic Kharnnigan language itself may also become endangered by the spread of new intercultural languages, notably Mongolian proper and Chinese. It is, however, encouraging to note that, although the Khamnigans have a certain tradition in quickly mastering colonial languages such as Russian and Japanese, a good command of Chinese is still surprisingly rare among them. To the contrary, there are examples that Kharnnigan (Khamnigan Mongol) has been adopted for daily communication by some of the Han Chinese individuals today living among the Kharnnigans. Buryat

Along with Dagur and Kharnnigan, Buryat is the third Mongolic language spoken in the neighbourhood of Evenki. The original territory of the Buryat speech community was, without

doubt, located in the Baikal region, perhaps predominantly on the western side of the lake. In this region Buryat was apparently exposed to its share of Evenki adstrate influence, and local groups bilingual in Evenki and (a protoform of) Buryat may have existed since the Middle Ages. Today, Buryat serves as a second language for several small Evenki groups living within the modem Buryat Republic (Russian Burjatskaja RespuhUka), though it seems that both Buryat and Evenki in the Republic, as well as elsewhere in the Baikal region, are rapidly vanishing under the expansive pressure of the Russian-speaking immigrant majority. The historical direction of expansion of the Buryat-speaking population was to the east and southeast, towards the sources of the Amur. Like the Kharnnigans, the Buryats voluntarily preferred to become subjects of Russia, rather than of China, and their expansion thus served to corroborate the Russian positions along the SinoRussian border. In the Onon basin, in the region of the modem 'autonomous' Aga Buryat District (Russian Aginskij Okrug), the Buryats came into contact with the Khamnigans, thus probably contributing to the geographical dispersal of the latter. While some of the already bilingual Khamnigans adopted Buryat as a third language, there are also indications of Buryat superstrate influence on the Mongolic speech of the Khamnigans (especially on the one of the two dialects of Kharnnigan Mongol that today survives in Hulun Buir). In the aftermath of the October Revolution, part of the easternmost Buryats, just like part of the Kharnnigans, moved over to the Chinese side of the border. These Buryats became subsequently concentrated in the region of the river Shinehen (Chinese Xini He) in the modem Evenki Banner of Hulun Buir. Not recognized as a separate minority nationality in China, the emigrant Buryats (Chinese BuUyate) are officially counted as a subgroup of the Mongols proper. However, as a prosperous and relatively numerous community (ca. 8,000 individuals), they have well preserved their basic linguistic and cultural heritage and continue to enjoy a certain

Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria

social prestige among the neighbouring ethnic groups. Bilingualism in Buryat is today especially common among a small group (ca. 300 individuals) of Khamnigans who, unlike the larger Khamnigan group in the Mergel region, followed the emigrant Buryats to the Shinehen basin. As the local population is heavily dominated by the Buryats, the Khamnigans on the Shinehen have largely replaced their original Khamnigan (Khamnigan Mongol) language with the type of (Eastern) Buryat spoken in the region. This language change was, without doubt, facilitated by the fact that, in a comparative Mongolic context, Buryat and Khamnigan are two relatively closely related languages, especially as far as their morphological structure is concerned. At the same time, the knowledge of Evenki (Khamnigan Evenki) among the Shinehen Khamnigan has declined, with very few Evenkispeaking individuals remaining today. To some extent, Buryat has also been adopted as a community language by representatives of various other nationalities in the Shinehen region. At the time of the emigration of the Buryats and Khamnigans from Russia after the October Revolution, a large number of White Russian cossacks and peasants also moved from Russian Transbaikalia to the Chinese part of Northern Manchuria. Both the Mergel region and the Shinehen region used to have significant Russianspeaking rural populations until the worsening of the Sino-Soviet relations (1960). Today, only scattered individuals of these Russians remain in China, and they have been forced to adapt to the local linguistic conditions. In the Shinehen region this has meant learning Buryat as the main language of local intercultural communication.

Oirat The Western Mongolic Oirat language was the dominant idiom of the so-called Jungarian Empire (ca. 1676-1757), a short-lived political formation centred in the region known as Jungaria (Dzungaria) between the Altai and Tian Shan mountains in northern Sinkiang. Originally spoken by a conglomeration of several closely

831

related Mongolic tribes, Oirat also became the second language of a number of other, mainly Turkic-speaking, ethnic groups in the region. Even today, Oirat remains a language of regional importance in northern Sinkiang. One of the Turkic-speaking populations that came under Jungarian influence were the South Siberian Yenisei Kirghiz (Russian Enisejskie kirgizy), today known as the Khakas (Russian Xakasy). A major nomadic power in the Middle Ages, the Yenisei Kirghiz tribal union had by the rise of the Jungars been reduced to a small local community in the Upper Yenisei basin. Therefore, the Russians arriving on the Yenisei had no difficulty in conquering the Yenisei Kirghiz territory, which subsequently became a target of intensive Russian colonization. However, a small group of the Yenisei Kirghiz succeeded in escaping the Russians by moving over to the northern part of Jungaria (1703). After the Qing army had defeated the Jungars and annexed Jungaria to China (1759), the Jungars were pacified by a series of population transfers. One of these transfers introduced a group of the Dagurs and Solons to Sinkiang (cf. above), while in another transfer a fragment of the indigenous Jungarian population was moved to the Nonni basin in Manchuria. This latter operation mainly concerned representatives of the OlOts, the leading Oirat-speaking tribe of the Jungars, but by some accident a group of the Yenisei Kirghiz was also included. Thus, a Manchurian diaspora community of previous Jungarian subjects speaking partly Oirat and partly (an early form of) Khakas was formed. Another transfer later dispersed this diaspora group into two parts, the one remaining in the Nonni basin and the other being sent to the Hailar region in Hulun Buir. By the present day, the Olot-Kirghiz diaspora group in Hulun Buir has ceased to exist in the ethnolinguistic sense, although some of the Mongolian-speaking inhabitants of the Evenki Banner still identify themselves as Olts. By contrast, both Oirat (OlOt) and Khakas (Kirghiz) are still spoken today in the Nonni basin, where the diaspora group is concentrated within the

832

luha lanhunen

county of Fuyu, immediately north of Tsitsikar. As the blOt part of the group is numerically larger (ca. 2,400 individuals) than the Kirghiz part (ca. 900 individuals), Oirat has long ago been established as the main community language for the whole diaspora population. This means that the Kirghiz part of the population is, probably since several generations, fully fluent in Oirat. In the official ethnic taxonomy of China, the blOts of Northern Manchuria are, just like the other Oirats still living in Sinkiang and elsewhere, considered as a subgroup of the Mongols proper. Similarly, the Kirghiz of Northern Manchuria, often specified as the Fuyu Kirghiz, are taxonomixally associated with the Kirghiz proper (Chinese Keerkezi) of Sinkiang. Especially in the case of the Kirghiz, the cultural and linguistic distance between the Sinkiang Kirghiz and the Fuyu Kirghiz is considerable. It is another matter that the Khakas language, as spoken by the small population of the Fuyu Kirghiz, has undergone many special developments, as compared with the modern Khakas language proper still spoken (by ca. 70,000 individuals) in the Yenisei basin. Under the modern conditions of Han Chinese dominance in the Nonni region it is no wonder that both Oirat and Khakas are rapidly disappearing as living languages among the remaining diaspora population. The number of Fuyu Kirghiz fluently speaking their proper language is today down to a few individuals, all of whom belong to the old generation. Rudiments of the earlier Oirat-Khakas bilingualism can also be found among some representatives of the modern middle-aged generation, but for them Oirat has already become the first and stronger language. Among the youngest generation of the whole population, even Oirat is known rudimentarily only, as Chinese has taken over the role of the dominant medium in all local communication. In addition to the groups speaking Oirat and Khakas, as well as Chinese, the Fuyu region, until recent times, used to be the home for small but resistant communities speaking three indigenous Manchurian languages: Manchu, Dagur, and Solon. The latter have now vanished

under the Han Chinese invasion, but it may be noted that many of the last speakers of Khakas among the Fuyu Kirghiz are not only bilingual in Oirat, but also fluent in Dagur. To some extent, Dagur has thus come to complement the traditional Turkic-Mongolic bilingualism of the Fuyu Kirghiz. Apparently, Dagur was the historical idiom of communication between the Fuyu Kirghiz and the local Solons. Mongolian proper

By Mongolian proper we understand here the language of the main indigenous population of both the Chinese-controlled Inner Mongolia (Chinese Nei Menggu) and the independent (Outer) Mongolian Republic. In China, the Mongolian nationality (Chinese Menggu) officially also comprises the speakers of Buryat and Oirat, but from the linguistic point of view it is, rather, a question of separate languages. Mongolian proper itself is divided into a number of dialects, of which Khalkha is by far the most important in the political sense. A language closely reminiscent of Khalkha has also been adopted as the oral norm for the type of standard Mongolian spoken on the Chinese side. Several local dialects do, however, survive, and they are widely used at the oral level. The most important oral variety of Mongolian proper in Northern Manchuria is Khorchin, the dialect of the indigenous population in the Inner Mongolian Khingan League (Chinese Xing'an Meng), immediately to the south of Hulun Buir. A major feature of Mongolian proper in China is that it also has a written standard used as an official language all over Inner Mongolia, including Hulun Buir. This written standard, which may be termed Modern Written Mongolian, is with few changes based on the earlier standard of Classical Mongolian. Therefore, Written Mongolian, even in its modern form, stands far apart from the spoken dialects of Mongolian proper, especially as regards the relationship between orthography and pronunciation. Due to its abstractness, Written Mongolian can also relatively well serve speakers of Mongolic languages other than Mongolian proper, including

Mongolic languages as idioms of intercultural communication in Northern Manchuria

Buryat and Oirat. It is, however, particularly well suited for the speakers of Khamnigan (Kbamnigan Mongol), a language that of all the modern Mongolic idioms preserves the most archaic phonological structure, remarkably close to the Written Mongolian orthography. In the currently existing Inner Mongolian school system, rural children of all nationalities with the exception of the Han Chinese (and other secondary) immigrants are normally educated in some oral variety of Mongolian proper as well as in Modern Written Mongolian. Mongolian proper is also used as an administrative language, as well as in radio and television broadcastings, while Modern Written Mongolian serves as a medium for newspaper and book publishing directed at the non-Han part of the Inner Mongolian population. In this situation, Mongolian proper has rapidly reached the position of a second or third language for speakers of other languages in Northern Manchuria, such as Dagur, Khamnigan (Kbarnnigan Mongol), Buryat, and Evenki. The most unambiguous example of the extension of Mongolian proper as an additional language to other speech communities may be observed among the Dagurs and Solons in the Evenki Banner of Hulun Buir. Mongolian proper is here the dominant idiom over Dagur in a very similar way as Dagur dominates over the Evenki language of the Solons. As Chinese is also widely spoken in the region, it is not rare to find trilingual Dagur and quadrilingual Solon (Evenki-DagurMongolian-Chinese) individuals. The knowledge of Mongolian proper is also common among the Dagurs of the Morin Dabaa Banner, while it is much more rare among those Dagurs and Solons who live to the east of the river Nonni, outside of the Inner Mongolian territory. In the case of the Khamnigans and Buryats, the status of Mongolian proper remains somewhat ambivalent. While there are individuals who make a clear distinction between their native Mongolic community language and the secondarily learnt official language of Inner Mongolia, there are also individuals who only approximate the official language by modifying their native speech in the direction of Mongolian proper. In such cases it

833

seems to be a question of diglossia rather than true bilingualism. Although both Khamnigan (Khamnigan Mongol) and Buryat in their pure forms are languages not readily intelligible to the unsophisticated monolingual speaker of Mongolian proper, the gap of intelligibility can be largely removed by modifications made within the framework of diglossia. A development from historical bilingualism through diglossia to complete monolingualism in a dialectal variety of Mongolian proper has largely taken place among the populations historically known as the Old Barguts (Chinese C hen Baerhu) and New Barguts (Chinese Xin Baerhu) of Hulun Buir. Originally two branches of the Buryat speech community, the Barguts reached Northern Manchuria much earlier than the Buryats proper and have by the present day lost most of the specifically Buryat features of their speech in favour of Mongolian proper. It is the Old Barguts that today form the principal Mongolian-speaking neighbours of the Khamnigans in the Mergel region. Therefore, the Khamnigan approximation to Mongolian proper is often reminiscent of the dialect spoken by the modern Old Barguts. A more prestigious model of Mongolian proper for both the Khamnigans and the Old Barguts is, however, offered by Khorchin, which is the native dialect of many of the leading cadres in the Old Bargut Banner. It must be mentioned that there are two indigenous groups in Hulun Buir that are largely untouched by the intercultural function of Mongolian proper. These are the so-called 'Yakuts' (Chinese Yakute), a tiny group (ca. 200 individuals) of Evenki-speaking RussianOrthodox reindeer breeders in the northernmost comer of the province, and the Orochens (Chinese ELunchun), a somewhat larger (ca. 4,000 individuals) group of Evenki-speaking hunters distributed on both sides of the border of Hulun Buir and the Amur Province. Until recent times, Russian used to be the main medium of intercultural communication for the 'Yakuts', while the Orochens were historically connected with the spheres of Manchu and Dagur. Today, both groups are rapidly losing their native Evenki

834

luha lanhunen

language in favour of Chinese. In the official ethnic taxonomy of China, the 'Yakuts' are, together with the Solons and Khamnigans, included within the Evenki nationality, while the Orochens are counted as a separate ethnic group. Although the realm of Mongolian proper in China is today increasingly confined to the Inner Mongolian territory, the language has also some foothold in the Amur Province, where there are several small indigenous Mongolian-speaking communities. As the Olts in the Nonni basin are officially considered to belong to the Mongolian nationality, there have been attempts of

propagating Mongolian proper, and especially Modern Written Mongolian, among them, too. These attempts have automatically comprised the Fuyu Kirghiz, for whom Oirat has become the dominant local language. It remains unclear for the moment, to what extent Mongolian proper may have caused diglossia or language change among the Oirat-speaking population in the Nonni basin. However, any further advance of Mongolian proper here is unlikely in view of the rapid Sinicization of all the indigenous groups in the region.

References While numerous descriptions of the various indigenous languages and dialects spoken in Northern Manchuria have been published, there is no special literature solely devoted to their intercultural functions. The following classic works contain the basic ethnolinguistic background information: Lattimore, Owen 1935 The Mongols of Manchuria. London. Shirokogoroff, S.M. 1929 Social organization of the Northern Tungus. Shanghai. The following titles pertain to the ethnolinguistic situation among the Khamnigans, the least known and in many respects the most interesting indigenous group of Northern Manchuria:

Relevant map Northern Manchuria area: partiaL language picture, contact languages. Compiled by Juha Janhunen. Map 96.

Janhunen, Juha 1990 Material on Manchurian Khamnigan Mongol. Helsinki: SFOu. 1991 Material on Manchurian Khamnigan Evenki. Helsinki: SFOu. The rest of the discussion above is mainly based on the unpublished field observations of the author, made during annual trips (1986-1991) to various parts of Northern Manchuria, with the focus on the Chinese side of the region. For details on the still on-going field project, see: Janhunen, Juha 1992 "Ethnocultural field work in Manchuria", In: Publications of the Finnish Association of East Asian Studies, vo1.l. Helsinki: SFOu.

Tibetan David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Tibetan is a Tibeto-Bunnan language spoken natively by some five million people concentrated in the traditional territories of Tibet. These include what is now the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China as well as Qinghai Province, parts of southwestern Gansu Province, the part of western Sichuan Province fonnerly included in Xikang Province, and the northwesternmost part of Yunnan Province, all now occupied by China. As a first language Tibetan also extends into the northern tip of Myanmar, western Bhutan, Sikkim, northern Nepal, northern Uttar Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh in India and the eastern and northern portions of Kashmir, now divided between India and Pakistan. This vast but sparsely populated area along and to the north of the Himalayas is now politically divided, but nearly all of it remains unified by its traditional religion, a variety of Mahayana Buddhism. The language has a very large number of regional varieties; for details see the relevant maps by Bradley in Moseley (1994). For religious purposes a literary variety of Tibetan is used; a diglossic High which as in many such cases is archaic and much closer to the written form of the language than nearly all spoken varieties. The religion and thus the use of literary Tibetan as a liturgical language has spread well beyond the ethnic Tibetan area; believers include a very large number of Tibeto-Burman groups immediately to the south and east of the main Tibetan area. A much larger group was the Mongols, who adopted Tibetan Buddhism when they were in control of all of China as the Yuan Dynasty; this belief was ruthlessly suppressed by the Russian-sponsored government of Mongolia from the 1920s to the 1980s, but it is making a comeback there now, and was never completely eliminated among the nearly five million Mongols in China or the Buryats in the Soviet Union.

Thus, apart from nearly five million first-language speakers, there are many more around Tibet's borders and a small number of Mongols, in China, Mongolia and the Buryat Republic in eastern Russia, who use literary Tibetan as their liturgical language . In Nepal Tibeto-Bunnan groups using Tibetan for religious purposes include many of the Gurung and Tamang and most of the Kaike, Ghale, Thakali, Chan tel and Manang with a total population of about 800,000. In northwestern India nearly 100,000 non-Tibetans in Lahul, Kinnaur and Almora who speak other TibetoBurman languages, and in Bhutan, southeastern Tibet and northeastern India another 350,000 Bumthang, Tshangla and other Buddhists use liturgical Tibetan in this way. In western Sichuan another 350,000 speakers of Jiarong/rGyarung, Ergong, ErsuITosu, Baima, Choyo, Zaba, GuichonglYutong, Muya, Namuyi, ShixinglXumi and PrimiIPumi also do so. Of these groups in China, all but the last is officially included within the Tibetan nationality; for details see Bradley in Moseley (1994). Also widespread is the Tibetan nomad herdsmen's lingua franca, Brokpa, which is based on a southeastern local variety also sometimes called Kham or Khampa. The term Brokpa may also be used elsewhere locally for the speech of herdsmen, some of whom, as in Bhutan or northwestern India, speak varieties which are more similar to other local varieties of Tibetan. Another tenn often used to refer to this and other subgroups of Tibetans which may cause confusion is Bhutia, Bhotia or Bhote; this is an Indic term used in India and Nepal to refer to local Tibetans living south of the main Himalayan ranges, and is sometimes extended to refer to other Tibetans as well. It is derived from the Tibetan name for Tibet, Bod.

836

David Bradley

The third variety to achieve wider dissemination is the local spoken Low variety of the capital, Lhasa. This is used by traders and as a spoken lingua franca among Tibetans, including the refugee population in South Asia and elsewhere. It is also used on the radio in Tibet and in India, and occasionally learned by foreigners including Chinese and Europeans. Around the periphery of traditional Tibet there were many small Tibetan kingdoms; all used literary Tibetan as their written variety. Most of these kingdoms have now been subsumed into larger political entities. For example, to the south of the main Himalayan range Ladakh in eastern Kashmir was conquered in the mid-nineteenth century by the Dogra rulers of Jammu and merged with Kashmir; Mustang in northern Nepal became part of the Gorkha realm and thus Nepal; Sikkim was merged into India in 1975. Along the eastern Tibetan periphery in what is now Sichuan the various 'Xifan' (western barbarian) kingdoms, each centred on a valley or several adjacent valleys and speaking a local language related to but distinct from Tibetan, shifted from Tibetan to

Chinese control gradually during the twentieth century. The only such kingdom to survive as an independent entity is Bhutan; this is the subject of a separate discussion because it has developed its own local official variety of Tibetan, Dzongkha, as a national language and lingua franca. In addition to the traditional Tibetan area, since 1959 (when China invaded and deposed the Dalai Lama, Tibet's traditional religious leader) a large number of Tibetan refugees have fled to the south. While about 100,000 including the Dalai Lama and his government in exile have remained in India, Nepal and Bhutan, smaller numbers have moved to a large number of developed countries, spreading their traditional religion among new groups. The following table shows the distribution of Tibetan refugees in India; while the largest concentration is near Mysore in the South, the Dalai Lama maintains his capital in exile at Dharmsala in Himachal Pradesh in the Northwest. Most of these locations are in hill areas, and some, such as Darjeeling, Sikkim, Ladakh and Tawang, have pre-existing non-refugee Tibetan populations.

Table 1. Tibetan refugees in India, 1981, Language spoken in the household StatelUnion Terr.

Number

Kamataka Himachal Pradesh llrunachalPradesh Jammu & Kashmir Sikkim Orissa West Bengal Madhya Pradesh Delhi Uttar Pradesh Maharashtra other

22,896 8,209 5,610 4,178 4,149 2,614 2,555 1,279 1,131 951 804 762

41.5 14.9 10.2 7.6 7.5 4.7 4.6 2.3 2.1 1.7 1.5 1.4

Total

55,138

100.0

Per cent of total

Main centres Mysore, Uttar Kannad Dharmsala, Sirmaur, Simla Tawang, Lohit Ladakh, Srinagar Gangtok Ganjam Darjeeling Surguja DehraDun Bhandora

Tibetan

In northern Kashmir there is a small Tibetan group, the Balti, who were converted to Islam in the fifteenth century. About five-sixths of the approximately 300,000 Balti live in the Pakistancontrolled portion, while about 50,000 Balti, also known as Purik, to their south are in the Indiancontrolled portion. Naturally their lexicon includes many Arabic, Persian and Urdu words; see Sprigg (forthcoming) for a comprehensive dictionary of Balti. Interestingly their Tibetan, especially Balti, is remarkably conservative and retains some prefixes of the written language that no other spoken variety still pronounces; but these groups do not write Tibetan at all as Arabic is their liturgical language. Urdu is the official language of Pakistan and of Indian-controlled Kashmir and thus their language of education and principal lingua franca. Tibetan in Bhutan Information in this section is based mainly on van Driem (forthcoming), but the author takes full responsibility for any errors in his understanding of van Driem and other sources. The national language of Bhutan, Dzongkba (dzong 'fort', kha 'language'), is a southern variety of central Tibetan. Also known as 'Ngalong, it is the first language of about 100,000 people covering the western half of Bhutan, with very closely related varieties spoken by another 40,000 people in various parts of the country. To its east are various varieties of the Bumthang group with some 106,000 speakers. More than 150,000 other Bhutanese speak one of four other indigenous Tibeto-Burman languages, Tshangla in the easternmost part of the country, Lhokpu, Gongdu or 'Olikha/Monpa. Another large group in southern Bhutan speaks Nepali; the proportion is discussed elsewhere under the heading of Nepali. Dzongkha is the national language, learned by all Bhutanese in schools; it is based on the court speech of the traditional rulers of Bhutan. Since 1975 Dzongkha and English have been the sole languages of education; the Dzongkha Development Commission has been making great progress in codifying Dzongkha, commissioning a gram-

837

mar, an official romanisation adopted 26/911991 and other materials. Written in traditional Tibetan script, it is also used for various media including the newspaper and the radio. Dzongkha is very similar to Danjongkha, the former court variety of Sikkim, and to Grom( 0 )wa, the speech of the Chumbi valley to the northwest in Tibet. According to van Driem (forthcoming), the other varieties which can be linked most closely to Dzongkha include the speech used by some 20,000 people along the Kurichu valley in the east which he calls Cho-ca-nga-ca-kha from the forms of second and first person pronouns, also various small groups of semi-nomadic herdsmen scattered around the country, and about 5,000 refugees from central and eastern Tibet, most of whom have come since 1959. Of course literary Tibetan also continues to be used in Bhutan for religious purposes, with a Bhutanese pronunciation known as Choke or Cho(e)key. The six varieties included in the Bumthang group comprise various large localised groups, including Bumthangkha, Khengkha, Kurtopkha, Chalikha, Dzalakha and divergent 'Nyenkha/ Henkha, and total just over a sixth of the population. These cover most of the eastern part of the country except for the southeastern comer, which is the Tshangla or Shachop/Sharchop (shar 'east') area. Van Driem estimates a Tshangla population of 150,000 or about a quarter of the total, which gives it more first-language speakers than Dzongkha; Tshangla is used as a lingua franca in the eastern part of the country. The other indigenous languages have small populations: 2,500 Lhokpu, 2,000 Gongdu and 2,000 , Olikha/Monpa. The term Monpa can cause problems in the identification of groups in the Tibetan cultural orbit. It is used by Tibetans to refer to a variety of Buddhist groups in southeastern Tibet who speak languages closely related to Tibetan. The Chinese have taken it over as the name of a nationality with two main subgroups, and it is also used in India as a cover term. Most of the people referred to by this term regard it as pejorative, but some accept it as an autonym as well.

838

David Bradley

The 15,000 Dzalakha of northeastern Bhutan, nearly 40,000 (1981 census 31,141) Monpa of the Tawang area of West Kameng in Arunachal Pradesh in India, and approximately 7,500 Monpa of Cuona (Tsona) in Tibet speak one language. This should not be confused with the 2,000 'Olikha/Monpa of central Bhutan, nor with the Monpa a couple of hundred kilometres to the east, some 40,000 Monpa around Motuo in Tibet and another 2,000 in adjacent India. A similar Tibetan cover tenn, Lhopa, was used to refer to non-Buddhist and relatively primitive Tibeto-Bunnan groups to the south of the Monpa; this has also been adopted by the Chinese as their Luoba nationality, which comprises a grab-bag of diverse groups mainly resident in Arunachal Pradesh but with a few spilling over into southeastern Tibet. In India each such group is now known by its own name, with various older and newer cover terms as well; see details by Bradley in Moseley (1994). In summary, Bhutan has a national language, Dzongkha, which is very widely used by the five sixths of the population for whom it is a second language; it also has Tshangla, spoken as a first language by a quarter of the population concentrated in the east and also used as a lingua franca there. Tibetan in Sikkim The extremely similar Denzong variety of Tibetan is one of four local languages taught in schools in

Sikkim. The local education authorities have devised a very slightly revised variety of written Tibetan for this purpose. Total Tibetan speaker population The Tibetan nationality in China was officially enumerated at 4,593,330 on 117/1990, the ninth largest national minority; this represented an increase of 18.57 per cent over the 1982 total. Of course over 300,000 of the 'Tibetans' in western Sichuan actually speak other languages but are Tibetan Buddhists and use literary Tibetan as their liturgical language . The figure of six million often quoted by Tibetan exiles appears to be too high; of course a horrifying number of Tibetans died from the 1950s onwards a result of Chinese oppression or starvation and ill-health caused by Chinese maladministration. In India the 1981 census recorded 55,138 Tibetan refugees; to this should be added the Bhotia populations of northern India, Nepal and Bhutan for an overall total of nearly five million speakers, with nearly another 1.5 million whose first language is related to Tibetan and who use it for religious purposes - in Nepal, northern India, Bhutan and western Sichuan as well as an unknown number of Mongol Buddhists in Inner Mongolia in China, Russia and Mongolia. There is also a small but growing number of Western converts who can use some variety of Tibetan, mainly the liturgical High.

Table 2. Estimated Tibetan population Country (additional)

First language

China Pakistan Nepal India Bhutan Mongols elsewhere

4,300,000 250,000 150,000 200,000 140,000 50,000

Names

Liturgical language

Zang Balti Bhote, Sherpa Bhotia, Sherpa, Tibetan Dzongkha

400,000 (Arabic)

800,000 150,000 260,000 ?? ??

Tibetan

839

References van Driem, George 1991 Guide to official Dzongkha romanization. Thimphu: Royal Government of Bhutan. forthcoming Languages of the Himalayas: an ethnolinguistic handbook. Leiden: Brill

Relevant map Tibetan. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 97.

Moseley, Christopher (ed.) 1994 Atlas of the world's languages. London: Routledge Sprigg, Richard Keith forthcoming Balti-English diciotnary.

Yi David Bradley The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. As the traditional dominant group of eastern Yunnan and adjacent areas of western Guizhou and southern Sichuan through much of China's thousand-year expansion to the southwest, the Yi were known by various names. In the Han period (first century AD) they were the Bailang; in the Man shu [book of the southwestern barbarians] (ninth century AD) they were the Cuan; from the autonym for some subgroups of western Yunnan they later came to be known as the Lolo, a term used up to 1950; and they were also included in the category of Yi which included various other non-Chinese group5 of Yunnan. After 1950 they were renamed Yi (but with a different character from the more general Yi) on the grounds that the term Lolo was pejorative because it included the dog radical. The actual characters are given before the references below. China's nationalities policy is Leninist; that is, it explicitly sets out to develop and amalgamate nationalities out of smaller groups. The Yi nationality is a prime example; it comprises six very diverse subgroups speaking several mutually

unintellligible languages. All of these would have been called Lolo before 1950, but the equation was based on ignorance; after 1950 it was based on the desire to amalgamate. Of the six varieties, the Western Yi and Central Yi of western Yunnan are completely distinct from the other four, the Northern, Eastern, Southeastern and Southern Yi. Western and Central Yi include a variety of named groups such as the Western Yi Lalaw and the Central Yi Lipo and Lolopo. The languages spoken by these two subgroups of the Yi nationality are fairly closely related to Lisu; in fact some sources regard Lipo as an eastern dialect of Lisu. It also appears that Southeastern Yi may fit better with the Western and Central groups, while Northern and Eastern Yi on the whole form a dialect chain which is fairly closely related to Southern Yi. The following table gives some details on these subgroups within the Yi nationality.

Table 1. Yi nationality Subgroup

autonym(s)

location

script

speakers (1995 est.)

Chinese bilinguals

Northern

Nosu

Sichuan NWYunnan

yes

2.5 million

few

Eastern

Nasu

Guizhou NE Yunnan

yes

1 million

most

Southern

Nisu

S Yunnan Vietnam

yes

0.9 million

many

Southeastern

Sani Axi Azha

SE Yunnan

yes

0.5 million

many

842

David Bradley

Table 1. continued Central

Lipo Lolopo

N Yunnan

no

0.6 million

substantial

Western

Lalaw

WYunnan

no

0.5 million

most

nonspeakers Of the members of the Yi nationality who speak only Chinese, many are descendants of Eastern and Southern Yi; also fairly numerous are nonspeakers of Western and Southeastern backgrounds. The Central and Northern subgroups, living in the most remote areas, are least affected by Sinicisation. Of the total Yi population of 6,572,173 in the 1990 census, about twenty per cent do not speak their traditional language; about another half are bilingual in Yi and Chinese, with only about two million who speak little or no Chinese. There are also about 10,000 Yi in northernmost Vietnam, where they are still known as Lolo and Phula, speakers of Southern Yi varieties. Of course many more Yunnanese Chinese are descendants of Sinicised Yi who no longer are aware of their background. Kunming, the capital of Yunnan, was the likely capital of the Cuan kingdom and is still surrounded by Yi villages in various stages of assimilation. Indeed the last pre1950 governor of Yunnan, Long Yun, was himselfYi. There are some features ofYunnanese Chinese, a southwestern Mandarin dialect, which could indicate a substratum effect from Yi; one is the tendency to use a bilabial trill or fricative syllabic for luI. As the table shows, four of the Yi groups had scripts: related traditional orthographies based on the same principles as Chinese characters but independently formulated. These orthographies were used mainly by male religious practitioners and were not widely known apart from these men. It appears that one of the criteria for membership of the Yi nationality after 1950 was the use of such a script, though the Central and Western Yi were included regardless. Since 1950 language policy for national minorities in China has gone through various

1.4 million

stages. The first, up to 1958, promoted romanisations, but none of the various attempts succeeded with any of the Yi. However since stability returned to China after the fall of the Gang of Four in the mid-1970s, new scripts based on the traditional scripts have been revised or developed, and some have been extensively disseminated. For Northern Yi, a syllabary of 819 characters plus one diacritic was selected from some 10,000 traditional characters after 1974; this is based on the Xide County speech of the Shengza subgroup of Northern Yi, which has about half the total number of speakers, is geographically central and widespread to the west into northwestern Yunnan. This standard dialect and the new syllabary have been taught very widely since the new script gained official approval in 1980. It is used with speakers of other varieties within Northern Yi, including some, such as the southernmost Sondi, whose own speech is quite different. There are also many books, a daily newspaper, radio and other media, throughout the Yi areas of Sichuan as well as in the portions of Yunnan where Northern Yi is spoken. An associated romanisation is used to teach Xide Shengza pronunciation to speakers of other varieties. Overall, this is the first dialect of about a million speakers and is known to some degree by nearly another million. For closely related Eastern Yi in Guizhou, a standardised version of the traditional characters has been developed; thus each character has a specific meaning. However, no one standard local variety is imposed, with students and teachers able to use the pronunciation of their own location. This was first agreed in 1982 and various educational materials have been prepared, giving pronunciations in up to ten local varietiessome quite diverse. The standard variety is

Yi

regarded as that of Bijie, but this is not generally imposed. This script has not been widely disseminated yet, and the proportion of the Yi in Guizhou who speak their local variety is decreasing fairly rapidly. In Yunnan, where all six varieties of Yi are spoken, the educational authorities had a much more complex policy decision to make. The Yunnan Nationalities Language Commission set up a group to consider the question in the mid1950s; this was working actively to develop a compromise dialect, a Yunnan Ausbausprache, especially after 1982. It was decided in the early 1980s to allow speakers of Northern Yi in Yunnan to use the dialect, script and materials developed in Sichuan and approved there in 1980. A committee of speakers of Sani, a major Southeastern variety, developed a syllabic version of the traditional Sani script and published a dictionary and some literature in the Sani orthography in the mid1980s, and this was promoted by the government of Lunan County, the only autonomous county in Yunnan where Sani formed the majority of the Yi. However almost no non-Sani can speak it, and it is not now used in any educational or other official setting-apart from the letterheads of various bodies in Lunan County! In 1987 a new standard dialect of Yi for Yunnan and an associated orthography were approved, and materials started to appear in 1989. This created its lexicon and characters by majority rule among Eastern, Southeastern and Southern Yi, also taking into consideration Northern Yi in the creation of the new characters and Central and Western Yi for lexicon. Even those involved in developing the dialect and its script have difficulty speaking it and even more in reading it, but it is early days for this radical experiment in reversing over a thousand years of linguistic divergence. In summary, Yi is one of the national minorities of southwestern China with over five million speakers of one or other of its varieties. The Northern Yi speech of Xide County in Sichuan has been chosen as the standard for relevant areas, and is spoken as a first or second dialect by nearly two million of the nearly seven million Yi. No

843

other universally agreed spoken standard exists, though a written standard has been developed in Guizhou and a newly-created dialect is being promoted as the standard for areas of Yunnan not already using the Northern standard. In addition about 70 per cent of the Yi nationality speaks Chinese, including about 20 per cent who speak no Yi. A very small number of Chinese and members of other nationalities have learned a variety of Yi, especially Northern, but the trend is in the other direction, of gradual shift to Chinese. Yi is a typical example of a complex nationality in China. There are various other cases where the authorities have developed several different standard varieties and different writing systems for speakers of different languages included within the one nationality; for example the three main SUbtypes of Miao, two of Dai, and so on. In some cases the same variety has two or more orthographies, as in the case of the Lisu and Miao of Yunnan who continue to use missionarydeveloped writing systems alongside new romanisations developed in the 1950s, and are now rejecting the new orthographies altogether; or various groups in Xinjiang who have moved from Arabic script to romanisation and back since the 1950s. The development of language policy in China since the 1950s, both for the Han Chinese and for the national minorities, is a very complex and fascinating topic which merits extensive further study. Characters: Bailang B1~ Cuan

•

Lolo

~

Yi (general)

1ti ~

Yi (post-1950) ~

844

David Bradley

References Bradley, David 1986 The Yi nationality of Southwestern China: a linguistic overview. Paper at International Symposium on the Histories, Cultures and Languages of the Minority Nationalities of China, U ni versity of California, Santa Barbara.

Relevant map The Yi and Viet languages. Compiled by David Bradley. Map 88.

1987 "Language planning for China's minorities: the Yi Branch", in: Donald C. Laycock-Werner Winter (eds.), A world of language: papers presented to Professor S.A. Wunn on his 65th birthday. Pacific Linguistics C-IOO, 81-89.

Some hybrid languages in China Mei W. Lee-Smith Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. China as a country covers a vast area. From its southern tip to its extreme north it extends over 5,000 kilometres in distance, crossing several climatic zones. Contrary to the popular belief that it is racially homogeneous, the Chinese people are made up of 56 different ethnic groups. The Hans constitute by far the dominant group, comprising 96% of the total population. The remaining 55 minority groups combine to form a total population of 46.21 million (1982 census). Most groups have their own culture and languages that often bear no resemblance to those of the Han-Chinese. Although the Chinese government has striven to promote Putonghua (Mandarin Chinese) as the national language, it is not true to say that everyone speaks Mandarin. Most minorities are bilingual or multi-lingual. Some minorities (usually urban dwellers), apart from their own languages, also speak the Chinese dialect of their district. Others, though multi-lingual in other languages, do not speak any Chinese at all. Yet others no longer speak their own languages, but have adopted Chinese as their native tongue. Historical and geographical factors have also contributed to the complexity of the language situation in China. For example, the vigorous trade activities between China and the western world via the Middle East saw a Silk Road bustling for centuries bringing traders speaking different languages from other parts of the world. To travel overland to China, merchants from the west had to negotiate the majestic mountains often referred to as "the Roof of the World". For Europe and China are divided by the Pamir ranges. Records show that Roman merchants from as early as the second century AD had travelled eastwards from the Mediterranean or the Black Sea along the Pamirs to arrive at the

border of today's Xinjiang province in China. Here they were confronted by the mighty Kunlun ranges (5,000--7,000 metres) and the Tian Shan ranges (3,000--5,000 metres). Trapped between these ranges was the Taklamakan desert at the relatively low altitude of around 1,000 metres. Taklamakan, where the day-night temperatures jump from one extreme to another and the wind changes the topography constantly, is considered one of the world's most treacherous deserts. The ancient Silk Road merchants from the west skirted north or south to avoid this menacing desolation. The north route trekked between the desert and Tian Shan and the south route travelled along a corridor sandwiched between the desert and the great Kunlun ranges. The two routes met up again in an area known today as the Hexi Corridor in Gansu province. The area they travelled through-the Pamirs and the western part of the Silk Road-contain all but two of the worlds 94 highest peaks and some of the most inaccessible deserts of the world. On the contrary, Xinjiang and Gansu, which consist of a series of oases, must have appeared as heaven to the merchants after months of hard travelling. Here they took rests, replenished their supplies and continued their journey eastwards towards Changan-the ancient capital of China. Xinjiang and Gansu thus became and remained for several centuries the rendezvous point for the Eastern caravans, the pivot between the East and the West. Its cosmopolitan atmosphere remained until the sea route became more favourable and replaced this treacherous overland route. Today many relics and traces of the past merchants activities are still visible. One of these is the different languages left by the many different peoples and the descendants of those who stayed and made their homes in Gansu, Qinghai and Xinjiang.

846 Mei W. Lee-Smith

Given such historical background, and its racial, cultural and linguistic diversity, China is indeed a fertile ground for hybrid languages that are born out of the western merchants' languages mixing with those that were indigenous to the areas. Some have, over generations, developed into local creoles. Although a few informal studies of some of these languages have been carried out by Chinese linguists in recent years, they are virtually unknown to the world. It is due to Professor Stephen Wurm's urging and support that four such languages were presented in this Atlas to serve as an introduction to this linguistic phenomenon of Northwestern China with a fifth, from further south in Yunnan and spoken by

people of Mongolian ancestry, also mentioned in this volume. It is likely that quite a few more such hybrid languages exist in China other than those described in this Atlas. The author is indebted to Professor Wurm who, despite being laden with international activities in multiple disciplines in Humanistic Studies, generously gave his time and allowed his vast knowledge on the world's languages, particularly on Central and Inner-Asian Turkic and Mongolic languages, to be drawn on for the analytical work on the above mentioned complex languages, of which typological boundaries are blurred.

Appendix Of the four languages Ejnu in Xinjiang, Hezhou and Tangwang in Gansu, and Wutun in Qinghai, sketchy descriptions have been given in separate articles in this volume, with the focus on demonstrating their hybrid nature. To present words and sentences in them, the phonetic symbols based on those of the IPA (International Phonetic Association) symbols as used for the phonetic rendering of Chinese dialects, Altaic languages, and Tibetan have been employed in these articles. Putonghua (Mandarin Chinese) materials contained in the articles have been presented in its standard pinyin transcription. For readers unfamiliar with these sometimes quite unusual phonetic symbols, the following may be helpful: Phonemic analysis, i.e. the establishment of sound contrasts affecting the meanings of words (as between "pit" and "bit" in British English where the contrast between "p" and "b" decides

the meaning of the words, i.e. is phonemic) is in progress in these four languages, but no full phonemic alphabets have as yet been established. The language examples are largely given in a phonetic script, i.e. contain symbols which indicate contrasts between sounds which may not affect the meaning of words. More of this is said below for the individual languages. Wutun The phonetic symbols used in the Wutun article are particularly complex, because words and examples from Wutun itself, Bao'an Mongolian and a Tibetan dialect are included in it. A number of Wutun examples are given in a purely phonetic rendering, containing also stress marks, but the majority of them are in a tentative, rather broad phonemic rendering. This Atlas is not the place to elaborate on questions of the phonemic analysis of Wutun which requires much further study.

Note: The term "British English" has been used here for the technical term "Received Pronunciation" (or RP). Vowels: Wutun front vowel as in "bee" but short

1 I

lowered close front vowel as in British English "bit"

Some hybrid languages in China

847

e

half-close front vowel as in British English "bed"

EI:

half-open front vowel as in British English "cat"

;}

mid-central vowel as in "-er" in British English "bitter"

e

mid-central vowel with slight lip-rounding, similar to the vowel in British English "bird", "sir", "nurse"

y

close front rounded vowel as in German "LUge" (but short) or in French "pu"

u

lowered close back rounded vowel as in British English "pull"

o

lowered close back rounded vowel, half-way between "pull"

{)

half-open back rounded vowel as in British English "or", but short

r

half-open back vowel as in "or", but with lips slightly spread, and short

a

open back vowel as in British English "father", but short

0

in German "ohne" (but short) and u in

Consonants: Wutun S, ware much like in British English

f, g, h, m,

t

dental without aspiration, as in French "tout"

k

without aspiration, as "c" in French "cas"

k~ t h "/C' and "t" with heavy aspiration, stronger than in British English "king", "table"

d

dental (not alveolar as in British English)

ts

as in "tsetse-fly", but not aspirated

tsh

as in "tsetse-fly", but heavily aspirated

t~

retroflexed, similar to t~h(see below), but not aspirated

t~h

similar to ts ~ but retroflexed, i.e. with the tip of the tongue turned upward and touching the palate behind the alveolar ridge

dz

like dental d + z in British English pronunciation

d~

voiced counterpart to retroflexed

~

voiceless alveopalatal fricative, half-way between northern German "ch" in "ich" and "sh" in "shine"

t~

like

d~

voiced counterpart to

f

as "ch" in northern German "ich", "nicht"

fh

like f, heavily aspirated

tfh

fhwith a palatalized t before it

~

retroflexed s, with the tip of the tongue turned upward towards the palate behind the alveolar ridge

~ with

t~

a t before it t~

848

Mei W. Lee-Smith

)j

a voiced palatal stop (somewhat like Hungarian "gy", with the y-part lengthened)

q

a post-velar k-sound further back then "c" in "call"

x

as "ch" in German ach"

y

voiced velar fricative, i.e. a voiced x sound

f

a glottal catch between vowels and before initial voiced consonants, similar to the northern German glottal catch before a word-initial vowel, as in )eine )alte )Ente"

I

as in British English like", not as in all"

n

dental, before j palatalized, as in British English new"

JZ

as n" in British English new" mostly only found before i, probably the same as n before

l)

as "ng" in "sing"

l)g

as "ng" in "finger"

r

tongue-tip "r", single or multiple flap

j

like "y" in "yes" stress mark, preceding the syllable to be stressed

Additional symbols appearing in Tibetan, Bao'an, Mongolian etc. words in the Wutun text They follow conventions for the rendering of words in those languages in transcription.

i

voiceless alveolar lateral fricative (= voiceless I, like Welsh "ll")

k'

in Tibetan words = kh

qh

Wutun q, aspirated

f

British English "sh" (voiceless palato-alveolar fricative)

tf

British English "ch" (voiceless palato-alveolar affricate)

tsh

in Tibetan words = tf

ny

in Tibetan words = Wutun JZ

ni

in Mongolian words is "ni", not "JZi"

Ejnu Most of the phonetic symbols appearing in the Ejnu text are covered by what has been said above for the symbols employed in the Wutun text. Some conventions regarding a and long a: in Persian words, which deviate from the IPA, are mentioned in the Ejnu text itself, i.e. a

low open front vowel, as "a" in French "rat"

a:

long low open back vowel, always rounded represented in the IP A system by D.

In

Persian words, corresponding to the sound

Some hybrid languages in China

849

Other Symbols in the Ejnu Texts a

in Ejnu and Uighur words: open unrounded vowel between front and back, like "a" in Gennan "hatte"

a:

in Arabic words: long low open front vowel, tending towards ce:

e

half-open front unrounded vowel, more open than "e" in British English "bed", but more close than "a" in "cat"

f1

half open front rounded vowel as in French "neuf' after a vowel; symbol indicates that the vowel is long

d3

voiced palato-alveolar affricate, like "G" in "George"

z

as in British English "zeal"

X

voiceless uvular fricative, further back than "ch" in Gennan "ach"

If

voiced uvular fricative (approximating French "r")

Hezhou The only symbol additional to those mentioned above under Wutun and Ejnu is:

over a vowel symbol = nasal vowel Tangwang The tone marks used in the Tangwang text are explained at the beginning of that text. Additional symbols not occurring in the other texts are:

a

open unrounded vowel between front and back, like "a" in Gennan "aber", but short

Ul

close back unrounded vowel, u with lips unrounded

t/,

British English "ch" (voiceless palato-alveolar affricate), but heavily aspirated

v

voiced labiodental consonant, similar to Dutch "w" (like "v" in "very", but with less friction)

~

voiced counterpart to retroflexed ~(see Wutun symbols)

Relevant Maps Hybrid languages and contact languages: Northwest China. Compiled by Mei W. LeeSmith. Languages in the Pamir and in Yunnan (yunnan, Khatso). Compiled by Stephen A. Wunn and Mei W. Lee-Smith.

North China: intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present. Compiled by Stephen A. Wunn.

850 Mei W Lee-Smith

Abbreviations used in the texts 1,2,3 adj affirm attrib caus Ch comit cond cont cv def dir distrib erg gen Imp ind instr interrog n neces

first, second, third person adjective affirmative attribute causative Chinese comitative conditional continuing converb definite directional distributive ergative genitive imperative indicative instrumental interrogative noun necessitative

neg nom obj obj st p pi poss purp q refl sg simul st sub sub st sup tr vb vn vol

=

negative nominalizer object objective statement past plural possessive purposive question marker reflexive singular simultaneous statement subject subjective statement supposition transitive verb verbal noun voluntative

The Ejnu language Mei

w. Lee-Smith

Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. Scattered along the old Silk Road from Kashgar to Khotan, in the counties of Shule, Yengisar, Yarkant (Shache), Karakakh, Khotan and Lop in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region in China, live a few groups of people who refer to themselves as the Ejnu people. The term Ejnu has no known origin. Officially the Ejnus are of Uighur nationality, but they deny that they are Uighurs and claim that they are of old Iranian (Persian) descent. Other peoples in the region call them Abdal, l a term intensely disliked by the Ejnu people. First reports on the existence of the Ejnu (Abdal) are found in F. Grenard (1898). It was reported that the Abdals were much like the Turks but speak a special language based on Persian. They had a very low social status, eking out a living by mat-making. Detested by the local Turks, the Abdals were left pretty much to themselves in the village which Grenard visited. Their status in neighbouring villages appears to have been better and intergroup marriages occurred. Abdal was a name used by others to refer to earlier Afghan and Turkmen tribes, but there is no reference to these tribes in eastern Turkistan where the Ejnus live now. Just like the Afghan and Turkmen tribes, the Ejnus also resent being called Abdal. Legends regarding their origin passed down over the generations are vague. They seem to indicate that the Abdals are descendants of Persian Shiites who were the forerunners of Islam in Eastern Turkistan. The place of Kufah was mentioned in connection with Persia. Grenard thinks the Abdals were in fact descendants of the ancient Shiite colonizers who were later oppressed and reduced to the lowest social rank by the subsequent orthodox Sunni conquerors. He observed that the Abdals endeavoured to pass for Sunnis but showed a few

traces of their Shiite allegiance: they secretly practiced some Shiite rites such as honouring the Imams as the descendants of Ali. In great secrecy, they performed the annual ritual of celebrating the mourning of Hussein, showing the same demonstration of sadness as was shown among the Shiites. The time of arrival of the Abdals might have been around the end of the 8th century. As said above the Abdal were a group of apparently Shiite Persians coming to Eastern Turkistan as forerunners of Muslim penetration. They were followed by a much more powerful group of Sunnis who forced this group into a very low social status. Later, in around the 16-17th century, when the activities on the Silk Road began to wind down, some of the large number of Persian merchants on the Silk Road stayed behind in the area where the Ejnus live today. A number of them, having lost their livelihood through the cessation of trading on the continental Silk Road, joined the Ejnus, intermarried with Uighurs, and contributed to the number of the Ejnus. There are no census figures available for the population of Ejnus as their claim as an ethnic group separate from Uighur has not attained any official recognition. However, the number of Ejnu people is estimated to be in the thousands. Ejnu are bilingual people. They speak Uighur with outsiders but among themselves, they speak their own language, which is unintelligible to the other peoples living in the same area. At a glance, the Ejnu language looks remarkably like Uighur. Phonetically, it shows a wholesale adoption of the spoken Uighur sound system, complete with the reduction of the front vowels i, U, y; the weakening of G, to e or i; and the same vowel harmony. The Uighur-like phonetic system is superimposed indiscrimina-

852

Mei W Lee-Smith

tely on all words, including those of Persian origin. For example, the front rounded vowels, I?T and y, which are common in Ejnu, do not occur in Persian. This is probably the result of a vowel shift that occurred under Uighur influence. Ejnu syllables consist of V, VC, CV, CVC, VCC, and CVCC. Some of the Ejnu words of Persian origin have, under the influence of Uighur, also lost their final -I, e.g., Persian

Ejnu

haft haft ni:sl

hep hef nis

Gloss seven eight negative, have not

The only typically Persian phonetic feature that is still observable in Ejnu is the presence of voiced word endings, b d g, e.g., Ejnu

Persian

ab

a:b

kard gurg

kard gurg

Gloss water knife dog

Ejnu

Persian

Uighur

paler - peder maier - meder batftfe lu)(ter kcs zen ser uftur koX kard rismal d3ama xor

palar - pidar ma:dar batJe du)(tar kas zan sar fUlur kuh kard risma:n d3a:ma xor-

ala-dala apa- ana bala qiz kifi ajal baf qosaq

Note: in Persian, a is short and fronted. A long a which is represented by a: is always rounded. In Ejnu and Uighur, a is short and middle, similar to a in German 'hatte'. Lexically, Ejnu seems to share a large proportion of its vocabulary with Uighur. 2 In a study carried out by the Chinese linguists Zhao Xiangru and Haxim in which a list of 4200 high frequency words were used, they found a rather high level of shared vocabulary between Ejnu and Uighur. On closer inspection, it became clear that most of the shared vocabulary items were of Persian or Arabic origin. As Uighur itself has a large number of loanwords from Persian (from earlier days) and Arabic, it goes to show that the Persian and Arabic strata in Ejnu are very heavy indeed. The following table shows some examples of Ejnu sharing cognates with Persian while in Uighur the listed words are of different origins:

10K

pitfaq OKamlfa kijim je

Gloss father mother child female child person female person head stomach/belly mountain knife rope clothes eat

Examples of shared Persian cognates in both Ejnu and Uighur: Ejnu

Persian

Uighur

buraler hcmfire hcmra(h) Xifoi derja

bara.·dar hamfira hamra:h a:foa: darja:

baraler hcmfire hcmra afoa derja

Gloss brother - friend sister companion good friend nver- sea

The Ejnu language 853

derwen taraza ejnek

darwa:za tara:zu a: ina

derwaza taraza ejnek (spectacles)

door scale (for weighing) mirror

Some examples of Persian loanwords in Uighur but of other origins in Ejnu:

Ejnu bazek (Montwl borsok) nyJ(Persian) d01JHUj (possibly Chinese) hatta (Manchu 'goods') Jumul (Arabic)4

Persian gird (round ~ ball) pija:z tarbuz (Turkic) ba.·za.·r Kiza:

Uighur girde pijaz tawuz bazar Kiza

Gloss flat round bread onion watermelon market food (a meal)

Affixes in Ejnu are often derived from Persian words with some semantic shifts. For example, Persian bad- "bad, poor, inferior" appears as bed- in Ejnu; Persian bi- "without", na- "no" appear as bi-, na- in Ejnu as prefixes to indicate a negative notion. Persian -ger for person "who is doing something", -dar for owner are adopted by Ejnu and in a sense, by Uighur. In Uighur, both suffixes only occur in Persian loanwords. For example:

Ejnu bi-Xewer na-ilad3

Uighur bi-Xewer na-ilad3

bed-buj sodi-ger dukan-dar

bed-buj sodi-ger dukan-dar

Gloss no news, not known no remedy, no use (in dealing something or someone) bad smell merchant (sodi, Persian commerce) shop-keeper (dukan, Persian shop)

with

There are indications that Ejnu is losing Persian suffixes (though often keeping the Persian stem) that indicate a profession or specialty, and adopting the Uighur -tfi in its place, e.g.,

Persian a:b-keJ suxun-sara: xar-ba:n

Ejnu ab-tfi sYXen-tfi gide-tfi

Gloss waterman (one who sells water for a living) debater mule handler

The Ejnu numeral system is a typical instance of a mix of the Persian language with a Turkic language, namely, Uighur. Its cardinal numbers are Persian, whereas its ordinal numbers are made up of Persian stems with Uighur-derived suffixes.

Ejnu jek du si tJar p end3e JeJ hep

Persian

Gloss one du two three sih tJaha:r ~ tfeha:r ~ tJa:r four five p and3 SIX JaJ hqft seven

jek~jak

854 Mei W Lee-Smith

hef noh deh bist seh sed hazar

eight mne ten twenty thirty hundred thousand

haji nuh dah bist si scxl haza.·r

Persian ordinal numbers from fourth to ninth have undergone a semantic shift and appear in Ejnu as cardinal numbers from forty to ninety: Ejnu (farum pend:sum fefum heptum hejium no hum

Gloss forty fifty sixty seventy eighty ninety

Ejnu ordinal numbers -nd3i - -ind3i, e.g.,

Persian tfaha:rum pand:sum fafum hqftum hajium nuhum

consist

Ejnu jekind3i (j ek+ ind3iJ durund3i (du+rund3iJ sirind3i (si+rind3iJ tfarind3i (tfar+ind3iJ pend3ind3i (pend3+ind3iJ fejind3i {fef+ ind3iJ hepind3i (hept+ ind3iJ hefind3i (heji+ ind3iJ norind3i (noh+rind3iJ dehind3i (deh+ind3iJ bistind3i (bist+ind3iJ sehind3i (seh+ ind3iJ

of Persian

cardinal

Uighur birintji (bir+intjiJ ikkintji (ikki+ntjiJ ytjintji (ytf+intjiJ t(Jtintji (tfJt+ intjiJ bejintji (bef+intjiJ altintji (alte+ntjiJ jettintji (jette+ntjiJ s ekkizintfi (s ekkiz+ intjiJ toqquzintji (toqquz+intjiJ onintji (on+intjiJ jigirmintji (jigirme+ntjiJ ottuzintji (ottuz+intfiJ

Gloss fourth fifth sixth seventh eight ninth

numbers

with

the

Uighur

Persian jakum durum - dujum - duwum siwum tfaha:rum p and3Um fafum hqftum hajium nuhum dahum - dihum bi:stum sijum

suffixes, Gloss first second third fourth fifth sixth seventh eighth ninth tenth twentieth thirty

Ejnu word formation is basically the same as Uighur. 5 Furthermore, Uighur elements are borrowed and attached to Persian words to fulfil grammatical functions that do not exist in Persian. Nouns Nouns are marked for number, person and case. The grammatical markers are identical to those in Uighur although the Ejnu stem words are often of Persian origin. Number in Ejnu and Uighur: Singular = stem + 0 Plural = stem + lar or ler(Uighur plural markers adapted by Ejnu)

The Ejnu language

855

Example: "a lot of books", waraq-lar = waraq (Persian, "leaves of paper") + -far (Uighur plural marker); "a lot of grapes", eggyr-ler = e1)gyr "grapes" + -fer (Uighur plural marker). Ejnu has preserved the Persian stem but adopted the Uighur plural markers while Uighur has a different stem; for example, Uighur "a lot of grapes" = yzym-fer. The choice of -lar or -fer is determined by the rules of vowel-harmony as in Uighur. Persons and possessive markers attached to nouns are also identical to those in Uighur:

Person First, singular (my) Second, singular (your, sg) Third, singular (his/her) First, plural (our) Second, plural (your, pI) Third, plural (their)

Noun, Plural -fir - -im -fir - -i1) -fir - -i -fir - -imiz -fir - -i1)lar -fir --i

Noun, Singular -im - -um - -ym --m -i1) - -u1) --yg- -1) -i - -si -imiz - -miz -i1)lar - -u1)lar - -y1)lar -1)lar -i - -si

For example: Ejnu mike mikem mike1) mikisi mikimiz

Uighur ejke ejkem ejke1) ejkisi ejkimiz

Gloss goat my goat your goat his goat our goat

Note: the forms ofthe suffix is conditioned by vowel harmony as in Uighur. Cases

Ejnu nouns have six marked cases: Nominative -0 Genitive -ni1) Dative -Ka -qa -ge, -ke

Accusative Locative Ablative

-ni -da -de, -ta -te -din, -tin

The alternative forms for case markers are results of vowel harmony and consonant assimilation the rules of which are identical to those in Uighur. For example: Ejnu hatta hattani1) hattaKa hattani hattada hattadin

Uighur bazar bazarni1) bazarKa bazarni bazarda bazardin

Gloss market (nominative) market's (genetive) to the market (dative) market (accusative) at the market (locative) from the market (ablative)

856

Mei W. Lee-Smith

Adjectives

Although Persian has an English-style comparative, i.e., az "than", Ejnu has adopted the principles of the Uighur augmentative structure in which Uighur suffixes are added to Ejnu stem words. For example: Ejou kalag - kalag-raq XUrd - xurd-raq kemte - kemte-rek

Uighur JOIfan - jOIfan-raq kitfik - kitfik-rek az - az-raq

Gloss big - bigger small - smaller young - younger

In some situations, Uighur suffixes can be added to Ejnu stems for emphasis and/or endearment:

Uighur

Ejou bela-din xurd-Ifina

Gloss tall (emphatic) small (endearment)

egiz-din kitfik-kine

Pronouns Ejnu personal pronouns are identical to those of Uighur as listed below: Personal

men sen u

I you he

biz siler ular

we you(plural) they

Indefinite - the indefinite pronouns in Ejnu and Uigher are all Persian loanwords.

her hitf hem

each one any same

Demonstratives

Ejnu has adopted Uighur style three-way demonstratives (see examples below) instead of the Persian two-way system, i.e., -i:n, -a:n "this, that". Ejou bu, ma, mana, mufu, mawu u, fu, an awu - ewu, afu - efu

Gloss this / near he or that / further that over there / far

With the exception of -an "that", all the above words are of Uighur origin and have gone through some semantic shifts. u could be of either Persian (u "he") or Uighur (u(l) "he") origin. The word u(l) is commonly found in almost all Turkic languages of which Uighur is one. Persian u "he" is probably a loan from a Turkic language because classical Persian has [v0'J for "he" which is still in use in modem standard Persian.

The Ejnu language

857

Interrogatives

Ejnu interrogatives are all borrowed from Uighur: who what which

kim nime qa}si

how when where

qandaq qatJan ne

Reflexives

The formation of Ejnu reflexive pronouns is also the same as in Uighur, i.e., they consist of the Uighur stem, (JZ "self' and Uighur possessive markers, e.g., (Jzem (Jzimiz (Jul)

myself ourselves yourself

yourselves himself / themselves

(Jzel)lar (Jzi

Affirmative pronouns

Ejnu affirmative pronouns constitute the prefix her- 6 and an Uighur interrogative pronoun: herkim anyone hernime anything herqa}si each Negative pronouns

Ejnu negative pronouns consist of the Persian hitf "any, ever, none, never"and a Persian, an Arabic, or a Turkic stemword or an Uighur interrogative pronoun, e.g., hitjkim hitJwaqit hitfnime hitJd3a)

no one at no time nothing (as in nothing will make him budge) nowhere

Substantival possessive pronouns

Ejnu substantival possessive pronouns consist of a personal pronoun and the Uighur suffix -(n)il)ki, which is a genitive suffix -nil) + ki "which belongs to ... II

men bu (Jzem kim

I this here myself who

menil)ki bunil)ki (Jzemnil)ki kimnil)ki

(it is) mine (that) belongs to here (that) belongs to myself whose (that belongs to who)

Verbs: structure, formation and compounding Basic verb structure and verb formation in Ejnu are identical to those in Uighur. They essentially are based on a stem which can be a noun, pronoun, numeral etc. onto which a Uighur verb forming suffix, -Ia - -Ie, is added. However, while most verbs in Ejnu are formed in this manner, Uighur has many single-syllable underived verb stem. Persian stems and stems from other languages in Ejnu are often distorted and extended by the addition of a consonant, e.g., Xis- "to do, to make", from Mongol Xi; finit "to sit", from the two Persian stems (ne)fin and (ne)Jast. For example,

858

Mei W. Lee-Smith

Stem ab niga(r)tytxorateJ XUnuk sYXen

Origin Persian Persian Uighur Persian Persian Persian Arabic

Gloss water look take eat fire cold speech

Like Uighur and most other Turkic languages (Uzbek, Kazak, Yakut, etc.), Ejnu has a large number of descriptive compound verbs consisting of a main verb which carries the main meaning of the verb compound, plus an auxiliary verb. The main verb carries a verb building suffix, -Ia, or -Ie, borrowed from Uighur, and appears as a converb (a gerundial verb fonn) marked by -po The auxiliary verb describes what may be called external features of the action indicated by the main verb. For example, the

Verb ab-Ia niga-Ia tyt-Ie xor-Ia atefle xunuk-Ia sYXen-le

Gloss to wash to look to take to eat to burn to freeze to talk

auxiliary element, -bol "to be" indicates the action has been fully carried out; -tur "to stand" is in the course of being carried out; -kef "to come" is carried out again; -ket "to leave" has been carried out to completion; -qo} "to put" has been carried out thoroughly; -qal "to remain" has resulted in a new state; -tjiq "to go out" has been carried out and there is readiness for the next action; and many more.

Examples:

;oslap bol: ;osla (- qisla-), possibly from Mongolian ;0-, "to make, to do" -la, Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; bol indicates that an action has been fully carried out to completion. ;oslap bol, "to be done/carried out so as to be completed and/or conclusion" ynyp tur: yn(y) , a verb of uncertain orIgm denoting a movement of leaving something and heading for any direction: coming in/out, going in/out, ascending, descending. -p, converb suffix; tur indicates that an action is in the course of being carried out or is taking place. ynyp tur has come to mean "to be going up and down, to and fro, coming and going" ynyp qal: yn(y), see above; qal indicates that an action has resulted in a new state. ynyp qal, "to be fallen" such as a leaf leaving the tree, coming down to the ground and remaining on the ground.

finitlap tur: it is a typical feature of Persian verbs to have two stems regardless of verb fonns. Ejnu has lost part of this feature by preserving one stem instead. However, some remnants of this Persian feature occasionally appear. For example, jinitlap tur: jinit, Persian (ne)fin and (ne)Jast, the two stem words for "to sit" -Ia Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; tur indicates that an action is in the course of being carried out or is taking place. jinitlap tur, "to be sitting (for a short duration of time )" metlep ket: met, Arabic ma:t, "to die" -Ie, Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; ket indicates that an action has been carried out to completion/conclusion. metlep ket "to have finished dying" "to be completely dead"

The Ejnu language

In some cases, semantic reinterpretation is observable in Ejnu in connection with such compound verbs, e.g., bisjarlap kEf: bisja:r, Persian "many, very" -la, Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; kEf indicates that an action has been carried out to completion. bisj arl ap kEf, "to be filled up" Xislap qoj, Xis- (~ qis-), possibly from Mongolian Xi-, "to make, to do" Ia-, Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; qoj indicates "to place, to put" and that the action has been carried out thoroughly. In Ejnu, the meaning of the auxiliary verb qoj becomes the main meaning

859

of the compound verb, "to place" or "the action of placing" nigalap qal: niga-, Persian nigah, "to look" -la, Uighur verb building suffix; -p, converb suffix; qal indicates that an action has resulted in a new state. nigalap qal, "to meet". Although Ejnu vocabulary has a large proportion of Persian and other loanwords, it has fully adopted the complex and typically Turkic structural characteristics (especially those of Uighur). This phenomenon clearly indicates that structurally the language has converged significantly with Uighur.

Verbs : modes and tenses As in Uighur, Ejnu verbs have active, passive, reciprocal, and causative modes. Verbs in the active mode have a -0 marker. The passive mode is indicated by a stem verb plus -n or -I, e.g., Ejnu niga(r)la niga(r)Ian

Uighur kor koryl

Gloss see to be seen

The reciprocal mode is indicated by a verb stem plus -J, e.g., Ejnu niga(r)la niga(r)la-fti

Uighur kor kory-fli

Gloss see (they) saw each other

The causative mode is indicated by a verb stem plus -t, -tur, -fyI, -dur, or -dyr, e.g., Ejnu tJobla tfobla-dur

Uighur ur ur-dur

Gloss hit to cause to hit

Ejnu verbs also carry temporal markers which are similar or identical to those in Uighur. To indicate present-future: Ejnu qisla-jtmm qisla-jtmiz qisla-jsm qisla-jdu

Uighur qil-itmm - qitmm qil-itmiz - qitmiz qil-ism qil-idu

Gloss I do, will do (it) we do, will do (it) you do, will do (it) he/they do, will do (it)

860

Mei W. Lee-Smith

To indicate past definite: Ejnu Uighur niga(r)la kor niga(r)li-dim kor-dym niga(r)li-diI] kor-dYI] niga(r)li-di kordi qisla qil qisli-duq qil-duq

Gloss see I have seen you have seen he has seen do we have done (it)

Sentence structure Ejnu sentence structure is SOY, and is basically identical to that in Uighur (although Persian also has SOY, its sentence structure differs from that of Uighur in other respects). In the following examples, all grammatical elements and markers are Uighur, for example: 1. The children are crying. Ejnu batjifi-liri Uighur bali-liri their children( sub)

gij aI)lidi. jimidi. they cry(p def).

2. Comrade, please have some bread. pise Ejnu Uighur joldaJ comrade( sub) 3. There are tadpoles in the creek. Ejnu ariqta in the creek Uighur eriqta in the creek

hesyt nan bread(obj)

batjiJe baby qumtJaq tadpole

xorlaI) jeI] please you eat kurka frog( attrib)

hes exists bar exists

4. My father brought a flint-stone from the market. SaI) pedirim hattadin jek Ejnu my father market from one stone bir dadam bazardin Uighur tJaqmaq flint my father market from one

ateJ fire(attrib) lefi stone

5. The wind blew up in the night. Jebde Ejnu in the night(locative) Uighur ketjie in the night(locative)

qislidi blew-up tfiqti came up

bad wind Jamal wind

6. Are there goats at your home? (-Q = question marker) xanida mike hesmu? Ejnu at home (locative) goat exist-Q Uighur ojde ojke barmu? at home (locative) goat exist-Q

yndi came epkeptu took came

nist not exist joq? not exist?

mu? Q?

The Ejnu language

Conclusion At a glance, Ejnu appears remarkably similar to Uighur. Indeed, it has been taken to be a Uighur dialect for some time. On closer inspection, it is clear that Ejnu is a language in its own right. Tradition and oral history indicate that it is probably the remnant of a language spoken by the ancient Persians who settled in the areas where the Ejnus live today. These ancient Persians appear to have come in two waves. The first wave arrived at around the end of the 8th century in two batches. The first batch were Shiites who came to Eastern Turkistan to spread the faith of Islam. The second batch were Sunnis, most likely stronger in both number and in fighting power. Later the Shiites claimed to be Sunnis, possibly to avoid being oppressed and persecuted by the latecomers. The second wave were Persian merchants who had been active along the Silk Road for centuries. With the cessation of trading along the silk road in the seventeenth century, some of these merchants and their followers stayed behind and settled in a string of towns along the southern route of the ancient Silk Road and joined the Persians who came centuries earlier. Because the second wave was made up mainly of merchants, they were not of a high social group? It may be possible to suggest the following scenario: the seventeenth century saw the final demise of the Silk Road (see the text by J. Harmatta, The languages of the Silk Route, in this Atlas). Most of the Persian traders who dominated the Silk Road for centuries, left. A few of them stayed behind. They intermarried with Uighur women. Their children learnt Uighur from their mothers. Their fathers, who had maintained a strong feeling of ethnic identity, which has continued to the present day, handed down to their sons and daughters the words from their original language, Persian. This resulted in the emergence of a hybrid languageEjnu-a language that is structurally and grammatically Uighur, but whose vocabulary is predominantly Persian or Persian-derived.

861

Judging from its lexicon and grammatical structure, it seems reasonable to regard Ejnu as a hybrid of Persian and Uighur. It is a good example of a language that is at the end of a process of being assimilated by another language and has gone through major typological changes as a result of it. Phonetically and phonemically, the Ejnu vocabulary has adapted to Uighur; Uighur vowel-harmony and consonant assimilation operates fully in Ejnu. Lexically, Ejnu is predominantly Persian, 8 though much of it has been petrified and simplified. The meanings of some of the Persian loan-words have shifted so that metaphoric expressions have replaced the original ones, e.g., nyJ for "onion" A very characteristic lexical feature of Persian, the presence of two different bases for every verb, each of which used as a base for different functions, is lacking in Ejnu. In addition to the large percentage of Arabic lexical elements, most of which can be traced back to its Persian parent language, Ejnu has borrowed a number of lexical items from other languages. For example, in addition to the items of the pronominal systems, which are almost entirely Uighur, there are other Uighur loans in the Ejnu vocabulary. Other sources of loans include Mongolian, Manchu, and some unidentified language(s). Grammatically, Ejnu has become agglutinative (Persian is an inflected language). It has adopted Uighur grammatical elements for the grammatical functions already present in Persian, as well as for the grammatical functions which are absent in Persian but present in Uighur. Although Ejnu is under tremendous pressure from the influence of Uighur, the social functions of the two languages have so far remained distinct. That is to say, the Ejnu people still speak their language internally and speak Uighur externally. It is, however, questionable whether Ejnu can resist the pressure from Uighur to assimilate and remain as an independent language for much longer.

862

Mei W. Lee-Smith

Notes 1. Abdal-plural of Arabic badal or badl, meaning "substitute, counterfeit, false, imitation" Also in Ottoman Turkish, abdal means "grade or rank in some dervish orders" "members of semi-nomadic tribe in Anatolia and Central Asia who made their living by playing music at weddings and funerals'" or (aptal, apdal) "stupid, simpleton, fool" In Persian abda:l means "substitute" or "generous or pious men, saints, hermits" or a "mendicant" 2. The Turkic Uighur in the southern part of Xinjiang and in the neighbourhood of Ejnu, appears to have more Persian loan words (from earlier Silk Road trading days) than the Uighur elsewhere in Xinjiang. Khotan was, for well over 1500 years, a centre for speakers of older and later more recent languages of the Iranian language family, e.g., Khotan Saka and Sogdian, and later modern Persian from ADI000 onwards. Borrowing from Ejnu is not likely to have been heavy, because of the low social standing of the Ejnus. Some borrowings are possible (S.A. Wurm, personal communication). 3. A metaphoric expression from Persian which originally meant "a drink made of onion juice" Ejnu has taken it for onion.

4. Original meaning in Arabic (also used in Persian) is "comprehensive, compnsmg everything" or "to be for everybody". Ejnu has assumed the meaning of food laid out for everybody, i.e., a meal. 5. Uighur is an Altaic language. It is agglutinative whereas Persian is inflectional. 6. h£T- is originally Persian. It is extensively borrowed by most Turkic languages. 7. Merchants were ranked second lowest in the Chinese traditional social hierarchy of scholars, farmers, artisans, merchants and soldiers. 8. Persian(=Farsi), a language of the Iranian family of the Indo-European languages, is not spoken in China. In close proximity to China is Tajik (spoken in western Tajkistan of the former USSR). Tajik is very closely related to Persian-so is the Persian (Afghan Dari) spoken in Afghanistan. Two languages spoken in westernmost Xinjiang, ChinaWakhi and Sarikoli - are also called "Tajik" in China. They are not Tajik, but are Pamir languages. They also belong to the Iranian family to which Persian and Tajik belong, but are only distantly related to Tajik and Persian.

References Baskakov, N.A.-V.M. Nasilov 1939 Ujgursko-russkij slovar [UighurRussian dictionary]. Moscow: State Publishing House for International and National dictionaries. Grenard, F. 1898 Le Turkestan et Ie Tibet, second part of J.-L. Dutreuil de Rhins, Mission scientifique dans la Haute Asie 1890-1895. Paris: Ernest Leroux (Appendice: "Races particuW:res de Turkestan Chinois": 303-315).

Pritsak, Omeljan 1959 "Das Neuuigurische" in: Jean Deny, Kaare Gmnbech, Helmuth Scheel and Zeki Velidi Togan (eds), Philologiae Turcicae Jundamenta, 525-563. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. Schwarz, Henry G. 1992 An Uyghur-English dictionary. Bellingham: Western Washington University, East Asian Research Aids and Translations, v.3.

The Ejnu language

Suleiman Hayim 1930 New Persian-English dictionary, 2 vols. Teheran; Berukhim. Wurm, Stephen A. 1953 "The Karakalpak language" m: Anthropos 46: 487-610. Wurm, S.A.-B. T'sou--D. Bradley (Australian eds}-Li R.-Xiong Z.H.-Zhang Z.X.-Fu MJ.-Wang J. (Chinese eds}-M.W. Lee (assistant ed. and translator) 1987-1990 Language atlas of China. Hong Kong: Longman (FE) Ltd. Zhao X.R.-Haxim 1981 "Ainuyu de shuci" [The numbers in the Ejnu language], in: Minzu Yuwen 2: 44-48. 1982 "Xinjiang Ainuren de yuyan" (The Xinjiang Ejnu people and their language), in: Yuyan Yanjiu 1: 259-279. Zhao X.R.-Z.N. Zhu 1985 Uygur- Yu Jianzhi [A brief survey of the Uighur language]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.

863

There has been a very recent publication on the Ejnu and their language: LadesUitter, Otto -Andreas Tietze 1994 Die Abdal (.A"ynu) in Xinjiang. Wien: Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, 604. Band, Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Unfortunately, it was too late to take notice of its contents for this Atlas text. However, its findings will have no significant influence on what has been said here, especially not in relation to the Ejnu language.

Relevant Maps Hybrid languages and contact languages: northwest China (Ejnu). Compiled by Mei W. Lee-Smith.

North China: intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm:

The Hezhou language Mei W. Lee-Smith Relevant maps are listed at the end ofthis text. Hezhou is a creolized language spoken by the Han and Huihui I peoples living in and around the Linxia Autonomous Region in Gansu province. It is also widely spoken as a lingua franca in Dongxiang Autonomous County, and lishishan Bao'an Dongxiang Salar Autonomous County, in Gansu province; as well as in Xunhua Salar Autonomous County, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Region, and the Huangnan Tibetan Autonomous Region in Qinghai province. The Hezhou speakers constitute a relatively small population in this region where the majority of the population are speakers of Dongxiang, Bao'an, Salar and Tibetan. The first three are Altaic languages while Tibetan is a Sino-Tibetan language. Hezhou was a place name used before 1949. Under the old jurisdiction, Hezhou covered an area that is approximately today's Linxia Hui Autonomous Region and surrounding areas in Gansu province. The language spoken there was referred to as the Hezhou dialect. After 1949, Hezhou was no longer used as a place name, but the language has retained its old name. Hezhou was believed to be a Chinese dialect heavily influenced by Altaic languages, particularly by the Turkic languages, Salar and Uighur. Results of further scrutiny of the available evidence suggest that the reverse is true. The language is in the process of significant changes caused by extensive borrowing. In fact it constitutes a hybrid between Sino-Tibetan and Turkic languages. According to the Chinese linguist, Ma Shujun, Hezhou phonetics is largely Chinese. There are only three tones (Mandarin has four tones, and some southern dialects have up to nine tones). Furthermore, Hezhou tones appear to be unstable. Its tone sandhi show changes that

are not typically those of a Sino-Tibetan language. 2 From the Chinese point of view, the tones are showing signs of becoming nonsemantic, and that the language may be on its way to becoming non-tonal. It seems more likely that the language started off as a non-tonal Turkic language and is in the process of acquiring tones. Unfortunately, information on tones in Hezhou is insufficient to establish whether they constitute Chinese tones imperfectly acquired by originally Turkic speakers or whether some other factors have played a part in this. Lexically, there are clear cases of function borrowing whereby a Chinese syllable is borrowed to fill in a grammatical function. The syllable becomes a grammatical marker which bears no functional or semantic resemblance to its original form. Grammatically, Hezhou has the agglutinative features of the Altaic languages. Its sentence pattern is SOY. The use of suffix markers is common and obligatory. Stem words consist of Chinese syllables but suffixes are often either of Altaic origin or borrowings of Chinese elements divorced from their original Chinese semantic meanings and functions. Unlike Mandarin which has no case markers, there are six case markers in Hezhou. For illustration, some of the following examples are shown in Mandarin, Hezhou and the Altaic Turkic language Uighur. Mandarin examples are set out in pinyin while those of Hezhou and Uighur in IPA symbols.

1. Subject marker Mandarin N +0 Hezhou N +0 Uighur N +0

866

Mei W. Lee-Smith

2. Object marker Mandarin N Hezhou N Uighur N N

+ + + +

0 xa « Turkic -yo; qa... ) ni (direct obj) ya (dative, indirect obj), -qa, ge, ke, lJa

Example: Is the house built? Mandarin Jangzi gai haole house build finished Hezhou JatsIxa ke house( obj) build Uighur fjni selip house( obj) build Example: This is the thing I bought for you. Mandarin zhe dongxi shi wo this thing IS I Hezhou t~I tiilJ¢ ft lJr ke this thing is I Uighur bu nersini men this thing( obj) I

mal (question) vfli-mu? finished (question marker)? boldi-mu? finished (question marker)?

gei for nixa

ni you

you( obj) sOlJa for you( dative)

mai de. bought. me

kni

buy for (direction). a/-d-im take-past-l sg-subj

The above Hezhou, Mandarin and Uighur sentences show that Hezhou has the Mandarin structure in the use of ft "is", but at the same time, it has the Uighur grammatical structure of a directional marker -ti (kni) which specifies the indirect object function of -xa on ni "you". kI is probably from Chinese gei "give". 3. The ''from'' marker Mandarin cong Hezhou -ta « Chinese colloquial da "from"; xethfJ possibly XfJ (Tibetan -ga "from") + Turkic directional marker, de(n) - tern) - darn) etc.) Uighur -din

Hezhou has two "from" markers: -ta and -XfJthfJ. -XfJth.e is restricted to refer to humans, and the verb that follows must indicate the notion of acquiring, e.g. "buy, borrow, take", etc. Example: (He) returned from Beijing. Mandarin cong Beijing huilai. from Beijing return Hezhou bet(;il)-ta XUI Beijing-from return Uighur bejd:}il)-din qajt-ip Beijing-from return(ing)

le-IIa come-past. kel-d-i come-past-3rd-sg-subject.

Hezhou Ie "come" is derived from Mandarin lai, not to be confused with the Mandarin Ie which is a particle indicating an action is completed. Hezhou -iia in final position indicates past tense. The "from"

The Hezhou language 867

marker in both the Hezhou and the Uighur sentences follow the location whereas in Mandarin it precedes the location. Example: (It is) borrowed from him. Mandarin cong ta from his Hezhou tha-xethfJ he (from) Uighur unigdin arijetke he (from) borrowing(obj)

nar place

jie de. borrowed( vn) t~ie-xa-ti.

borrowing( obj) (aldim) (took-I)

Hezhou t¢e-xa-ti, from the Mandarin verbal nounjie de: "something borrowed". This appears as t¢e--ti in Hezhou. Just as the grammatical pattern of Uighur which requires an object marker to identify the object, the Hezhou object also requires the presence of a marker -xa. Furthermore, the object marker has primary importance to the Hezhou speaker and it is therefore placed immediately after t¢e with -ti added on following the model of the Mandarinjie de. The Uighur rendering of this sentence has the verb aldim "took-I" at the end whereas the Hezhou example, like in Mandarin, contains no verb at all. This however, need not be interpreted as attributable to pressure from Mandarin, because it is permissible in Uighur to omit a final verb provided the meaning of a short sentence is clear as is the case with this example. It is therefore, plausible to suggest that the Hezhou speaker has omitted a possible verb just as an Uighur speaker would.

4. The "to (until) " marker Mandarin dao Hezhou -thala «Turkic da(p "from" + Tibetan -Ia"to") Uighur -qitfe (kitfe, -gitfej Example: He slept until noon. Mandarin ta shui dao he slept until Hezhou tha ~iiy-thala he noon-until Uighur u tfyfkitfe he noon-until

zhongwu. noon. ~I-li:J

sleep-past. uXli-d-i sleep-past-3rd-sg-subject.

5. Possessive marker Mandarin 0 or de Hezhou -ti « Chinese de) Uighur -nil]

Example: my father Mandarin wo I l]r-ti Hezhou I-poss Uighur menil] I-poss

baba father ata father ata-m father/poss 1

868 Mei W Lee-Smith

6. Instrumental marker Mandarin not applicable Hezhou -Ia «Turkic hilen, ile, -Ie- -Ia) Uighur -hilen Example: What would you serve them with (i.e., food and drinks)? Mandarin ni yong sheme zhaodai tamen. you use what serve them Hezhou ni tham-xa Juna-Ia khu£-t£-li? you them(obj) what(instru) wait on (intention) Uighur sen ularni nime hilen kyt-mektji-sVl you them(obj) what(instru) wait upon-intention-2nd sg-subject Hezhou (ham, contracted from Mandarin (amen; khult- possibly from Uighur kyt- "wait upon", -e-, a filling vowel to avoid a phonotactically unacceptable consonant cluster. It is also possible that Jchulte- is from formal Mandarin kuandai"to entertain, to serve (food etc.)"; -Ia is an instrumental marker mirroring the Uighur instrumental marker -hilen; -Ii, a marker indicating intention or anticipating an action. The Uighur equivalent, -mektji also indicates intention. However, in Uighur, a second person singular subject marker, -sen, must also be present. In the above sentence, as in the Uighur sentence, the Hezhou sentence does not require a question marker because of the presence of the question word nime"what" in the Uighur sentence, and Juna in the Hezhou sentence. Example: (You) say it in Putonghua. Mandarin ni yong Putonghua shuo. you use Mandarin say. Hezhou ni p~tJyjgxua-la ~o you Mandarin(instru) say. Uighur sen puntUIJxua-biien suzie you Mandarin with say. Hezhou ~o is a direct loan from Mandarin shuo "say". In Hezhou, however, ~o also performs a grammatical function that occurs in Uighur but not in Mandarin. As a grammatical element, it is weakened to ~r, as a verb, it can be either ~o or ~I. For the grammatical function of g see Converbs below. Other typically Turkic grammatical features found in Hezhou include:

Converbs 4 1. -t~~ There is an obligatory marker, -t~~, in Hezhou, which reflects the function of a converb (cv) in Altaic languages. There is no corresponding function in Mandarin. Just as converbs marked by -p in Uighur do not stand at the end of a sentence, -(~~ cannot stand at the end of a sentence (see examples I and 2 below). The Uighur form de-p is an exception to this rule. It indicates a very strong intention. The Hezhou equivalent to the Uighur sentence-final de-p is ~jt~~li The latter also can appear at the end of a sentence or as part of a sequence of several short sentences each of which could stand alone. In Uighur, dep (de "to say" + the converb marker -p) can also be replaced by the sentence final inflected form dedi

The Hezhou language 869

(literally "he said") (see examples 3 and 4 below). While -Ii indicates intention, an anticipated event or action which is not necessarily a regular or obligatory occurrence, ~it~aIi marks an intention or anticipation which implies a regular or unavoidable occurrence. Example 1: When the movie finished, we returned. Mandarin dianying wanle, women movie finished, we Hezhou

tiijil)

vfIi;) t~a finish(cv),

Uighur

movie kino movie

jiu then

huilai Ie. returned.

tso xUIle-Ii;)

l)rllJ we

then return-past.

tygep

biz

qajt-t-uq

finish(cv),

we

return(def. p, Ipl)

Example 2: (I) went to the market, bought things, (and) then returned. shangjie qu maile (I) went to market to (intention) bought

dongxi things

Mandarin Hezhou Uighur

jiu then

huilaile. returned.

ke~ii

t(;1j-Ii:r t~a

tiiI](;i i

me~iiIi:r t~a

tso

xUI-t~:?le-lb

market

go to(cv)

things

bought(cv)

then

return(cv) come-past.

bazarya

tJiqip

nerse-kerek-ler-ni

setiweIip

market to

go out( cv),

things-necessities( obj)

bought(cv)

qajtip

keldim

return(cv)

came I(sub).

Final -Ii;) in Hezhou indicates past continuing on to future; -t~a is from Mandarin -zhe, the latter is a tense particle that is somewhat like English "-ing". In Hezhou, -t~a does not carry the notion of tense, it is added as a surrogate converb marker to the verbs to mirror the Uighur usage of a converb. Such converbs indicate an ongoing action, and/or that the consequences of such action persists while another action has become the new focus of the sentence. Hezhou verbs also add the past tense marker, -Ii;) before -t~a. Such a tense marker is not required in Uighur. Example 3: The sun is setting. Mandarin ri luo. lower sun Hezhou

~atho

luo-Ii

~It~aH

Uighur

sun kyn sun

set-intention olturaj set-intention (I)

dep

qaldi

say

definite 3 past

say(def)

Example 4: Hurry, (because) the train is coming (i.e., hurry, the train coming said) kuaidianr, huoche yao dao Ie Mandarin hurry, train will arrive (action completed). Hezhou

Pue(;ie,

xuot~ha

t:r Ii

Uighur

hurry, tez bol, quick be,

train pojiz train

arrive (intention) say(cv)(def) kelip qalaj come(cv) def. intent.- I (train speaking)

~it~aIi

He said, hurry, the train said "I am definitely coming".

didi says he.

870 Mei W. Lee-Smith

Example 5: It was too cold, he did not come. Mandarin tianqi leng, ta mei lai. come. weather cold, he neg. tha thie 111)-t~;J Hezhou ~1-t~;J he weather cold(cv) say(cv) Uighur u xawa so yaq d£p he weather cold (nladj) say(cv)

m:r/£. neg. come. k£1-mi-d-i come neg. past 3sg subj.

In the above Hezhou sentence, two successive verbs are marked by converb markers. The first one, 111), based on Mandarin leng for "cold", is apparently perceived by the Hezhou speakers as being verbal in nature, i.e., to be cold. The Uighur version contains a word which is a noun or adjective. It seems that Hezhou is influenced here by Uighur perception which tends to express many things through verbal forms in contrast to Chinese in which they are expressed in nominal forms. In this sentence, the Hezhou speakers are over-adjusting to the Uighur perceptual mould. 2. -~ in Hezhou has the following characteristics: a. It is sentence final when it does not function as a converb. b. It is not obligatory to add a person subject. Its Uighur equivalent is indicated by suffixes added to the verb, de, together with an optional pronoun. c. It mirrors the Uighur converb form -dep in its various functions. Mandarin Hezhou Uighur

not applicable. -~

-dep

Example: He says he has no time today. jintian Mandarin ta shuo ta today he said he m;J ji1)k;JtSI Hezhou tha today not have he bygyn Uighur u waxtim my time he today

meiyou not have kfi1]fu time joq is not

gongfu. time. ~l

says (he) d£jdu says he

The above example shows a sentence structure that is half Mandarin and half Uighur with ji1)k;JtSI m;J kfi1]fu corresponding to Mandarin but the placement of the verb follows Uighur word order. -~

(weakened -~o "to say") combined with the converb marker -t~;J, as purpose or reason. A corresponding sentence structure is absent in Mandarin.

-~ltj;J,

indicates intention,

Example: He went out to buy a book. shu Ie. mai Mandarin fa chuqu (action completed) book buy He go out t~hut(;hlli:J t(;hl-li Hezhou m£ ~u ~lt~~ (he) out go(p) say(cv) go (intention) buy book tjikti d£p kitap alim£n Uighur out go(p 3rd sg) say(cv) book I (am going to) buy

The Hezhou language 871

In the above Hezhou sentence, although the lexicon appears to be entirely Mandarin, the word order and grammatical structure is completely Uighur.

Necessitative Another Hezhou sentence structure that closely mirrors those of the Uighur is in the presence of necessitative markers: Uighur

vn(p)

+ kerek (necessary-positive) + kerek emes (necessary-negative) + kerek-mu (necessary-question)

Hezhou

vn(p)

+ j ali (necessary-positive) + pujo (necessary-negative) + jafa (necessary-question)

Note: vn = verbal noun. The Hezhou necessitative markers are borrowed Mandarin elements but semantically at variance with Mandarin usage as shown below. jaia in Hezhou is an interrogative necessitive form, whereas in Mandarin it is an emphatic form. The necessity markers in Hezhou, mirroring Uighur usage, stand at the end of the sentence while in Mandarin, the equivalent of such markers precede the verb. In the following examples, the suffix -Ii in the Hezhou verbal noun t~hIti is probably derived from Mandarin de. -ti closely reflects the verbal noun ending in -if in the Uighur equivalents. Again, these sentences reflect Uighur thought patterns expressed with elements taken from Mandarin. Mandarin

yao (necessary) buyao (not necessary) yaofa (necessary emphatic)

Example: Is it necessary to go to the hospital? Mandarin yaobuyao shang need not need go to Hezhou jiye-li t~hI-ti hospital inside go(vn) Uighur doxturxani-Ka berif Doctor house to go(vn) Example: (It is) necessary to go to the hospital. Mandarin yao shang necessary go Hezhou jiye-li t~hI-ti hospital inside go(vn) Uighur doxturxani-Ka berif hospital inside go(vn)

yiyuan hospital? jaia necessary-question? kerek-mri? necessary-question? yiyuan fa. hospital jali necessary-definite. kerek necessary-pos.

872 Mei W Lee-Smith

Example: (It is) not necessary to go to the hospital. Mandarin bu yong shang not necessary go Hezhou jiyl-li t(;hI-ti hospital inside go(vn) Uighur doxturxani-Ka benf hospital inside go(vn)

Conclusion Hezhou presents an unusual picture. Superficially, it appears to be Chinese. However, on closer inspection, most of its structural and grammatical features distinctly reflect Altaic, especially Turkic, general characteristics. In fact, highly distinctive Turkic features are mirrored in the language though there is little formal agreement, e.g., the obligatory use of converb markers in Hezhou. However, the underlying principles are near-identical in Hezhou and Uighur. This indicates that Hezhou is conceptually Uighur, i.e., the speaker's thought pattern is along that of the Uighur speaker's rather than that of a Chinese. This manifests itself in principles governing word order, and in the manner in which verbal and nominal inflection mirrors that of Uighur. The lack of inflection with the Chinese elements utilized by Hezhou is compensated for by the adoption of Chinese-looking suffixes to express the typically Turkic grammatical functions. For example, the use of -t~:J to create converbs, modeled on the Uighur converb formation by adding the suffix p; and the use of Mandarin particle, verb+-ti, to form verbal nouns that bear a vague resemblance to the Mandarin forms, but are syntactically at variance with Mandarin. Some of the attempts at imitating the complex Uighur grammatical features are rudimentary. This is due to the language material that Hezhou operates with, i.e., Chinese, which does not lend itself to approximate in great detail the subtleties of the highly elaborate Uighur morphology. However, the syntactic principles of Uighur, including the syntactic functions of individual elements in

yiyuan. hospital

pup necessary-negative.

ber£k£mes necessary-negative

Hezhou sentences, are largely followed and are quite different from those in Mandarin Chinese. It is also worth noting that although Hezhou phonetics is basically Mandarin Chinese, its tones are clearly non-semantic and that its tone sandhi show changes that are not typically SinoTibetan. This leads to the question of whether the language is becoming non-tonal or if it is originally a non-tonal language struggling to acquire tones. If Hezhou had been a form of Chinese influenced by Uighur, one would expect Uighur lexical loans and Chinese grammatical forms before the language would change to employ Uighur principles of expression. However, this is not the case. It seems therefore somewhat more plausible to assume that Hezhou was originally an Altaic, and more specifically, a Turkic language which has been heavily influenced by Mandarin Chinese. It adopted largely Mandarin vocabulary and Mandarin elements to mirror the functions of elements in Turkic structure. This corresponds to the more commonly observed direction of language change as a result of language contact and influence in which vocabulary is the first to be adopted. It also seems more plausible in the general language situation in China to assume that Chinese would influence a minority language to the point where it is moving strongly in the direction of becoming Chinese, rather than an Altaic (Turkic) language changing the principles of Chinese grammar in Chinese without exercising a strong influence upon its lexicon.

The Hezhou language 873

Notes 1. The Huihui people are Muslims. They are traditionally regarded as a minority ethnic group in China although they are by no means a single ethnic group but consist of a number of different groups of diverse ethnic backgrounds. 2. Some Altaic, especially Turkic languages have a rare phenomenon of very elaborate and predictable interaction between stress and pitch features, of which the conditioning factors are extremely complex. These phenomena resemble tones, though their functions are not directly comparable to tones in Sino-Tibetan languages (Wurm 1953). It is

possible that the Hezhou tones are not tones at all, but something resembling the stress and pitch features of the Turkic languages. 3. Not all linguists agree that -qitJe is a case marker. 4. Converbs, a typical feature of Turkic languages, are sometimes called gerunds by linguists. They are unchangeable sentence medial verbal forms not marked for person and tense etc. which correspond to those indicated by the main verb at sentence final position. Converbs indicate successive, simultaneous and other sequential actions.

References Baskakov, N.A.-V.M. Nasilov 1939 Ujgursko-russkij slovar [UighurRussian dictionary]. Moscow: State Publishing House for International and National dictionaries. LiW. 1993 "Gansu Linxia yidai fangyan de houzhici xa la" [The postpositions xa and la in the dialects of the Gansu and Linxia areas], in: Zhongguo Yuwen 6: 435. MaS. 1984 "Hanyu Hezhouhua yu Altai yuyan" [Some comparisons between the Hezhou dialect of Chinese and Altaic languages], in: Minzu Yuwen 2: 50-56. Pritsak, Omeljan 1959 "Das Neuuigurische", in: Jean Deny, Kaare Gmnbech, Helmuth Scheel and Zeki Velidi Togan (eds), Philologiae Turcicae jundamenta, 525-563. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Schwarz, Henry G. 1992 An Uyghur-English dictionary. Bellingham: Western Washington University, East Asian Research Aids and Translations, v.3. Suleiman Hayim 1930 New Persian-English dictionary, 2 vols. Teheran; Berukhim. Wurm, Stephen A. 1953 "The Karakalpak language", m: Anthropos 46: 487-610. Wurm, S.A.-B. T'sou-D. Bradley (Australian eds) -Li R. -Xiong Z.H. -Zhang z.x. -Fu MJ. -Wang J. (Chinese eds) -M.W. Lee (assistant ed. and translator) 1987-1990 Language atlas o/China. Hong Kong: Longman (FE) Ltd.

Relevant Maps Hybrid languages and contact languages: northwest China (Hezhou). Compiled by Mei W. Lee-Smith.

North China: intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm.

The Tangwang language Mei W. Lee-Smith Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. Tangwang is a creolized language with combined features of Chinese (Mandarin) and Dongxiang. 1 The latter is a language of the Mongolian Stock of the Altaic Phylum. Lexically and phonetically, Tangwang is Chinese; grammatically, it is Dongxiang. It is spoken in a dozen or so villages located in the northeastern comer of Dongxiang Autonomous County in the Dongxiang Autonomous Region in Gansu province. Of these villages, the Tangjia village and the Wangjia village are the most populous. The language is thus referred to as Tangwang. These villages are surrounded by towns and villages inhabited by the Han, Huihui and Dongxiang2 peoples. The Tangwang speakers identify themselves as either of the Huihui or the Dongxiang nationality, but they do not speak Dongxiang. There are about 20,000 Tangwang speakers.

Tangwang has a Chinese-based vocabulary. Phonetically, it IS similar to Putonghua (Mandarin) with one major difference: grammatical elements in Tangwang, a number of which are lexically Chinese but took on Dongxiang grammatical roles, are toneless. There are four tones belonging to the following tone categories: yin-ping, yang-ping, shang, and qu. 3 The tone values in Tangwang are different from those in Mandarin. The table below shows the Tangwang tone contours represented in a pentatonic scale in which 5 is on the top and 1 at the bottom of the scale.

yin-ping yang-ping shang qu

Source Persian

Dongxiang asunnan

35 214 41

Tangwang

24 554

224 31

The yin-ping tone in Mandarin has a tone property of level and sustaining high, whereas in Tangwang it is low and rising. The yang-ping tone in Mandarin is mid-rising to the top, but in Tangwang it is high, lengthened and then lowered very slightly. The tone duration of yangping in Tangwang is slighly longer than that in Mandarin. The shang tone in Mandarin starts from a fairly low position, lowering to the bottom of the scale, then rises fairly sharply to almost the top of the scale; in Tangwang, the tone starts at low and stays at that level instead of lowering further, with the final part of the tone rising as in Mandarin. The qu tone in Mandarin starts off from the second highest position, dropping quite drastically to the bottom of the scale; in Tangwang, it starts from midlevel and the drop is not quite so dramatic. The yin-ping and shang tones in Tangwang appear to be in the process of merging. Indeed, unless attention is brought to it, speakers have ceased to hear the difference between these two tones. Like Mandarin, Tangwang also has complex tone sandhi. Tones are also imposed onto a large number of borrowings from nontonal languages, mostly from Arabic, Persian, and to a smaller extent, from Dongxiang. Loanwoards from Arabic and Persian are often connected to religion.

Examples: Tangwang a224snna53ni

Mandarin 55

Gloss heaven

876

Mei W. Lee-Smith

md 1tf'i ku31 1a53 ni a224na24 a31 ta su224xu&3t~1!53

t~&24lit' kui224ku~3

Arabic Arabic Dongxiang Dongxiang Dongxiang Dongxiang Dongxiang

maotl'i qurayan ana ata suxuant~w

t~;mli;m

koko

die Koran mother father bridesmaid friend breast

Grammatically, Tangwang is modelled on Dongxiang. The formation of verbs is agglutinative. Phonetically and lexically, Tangwang closely resembles Mandarin Chinese. Even the Dongxiang-like grammatical elements are often borrowed from Chinese. These elements are divorced from their original semantic meanings. Furthermore, these grammatical elements, regardless of source, do not carry any tones.

Nouns Plural markers

singular plural

Tangwang -0 -m

Dongxiang -0 -la

Following the grammatical pattern of Dongxiang, a plural suffix, -m, is used in Tangwang. -m is from the Mandarin "human plural particle", men. However, Tangwang -m is a general plural marker. For example: Tangwang sheep(sg) sheep(pl) sheep(sg) Dongxiang qoni sheep(pl) qoni-la Cases

The are only four case markers in Tangwang, in contrast to eight in Dongxiang: basic object (direct) (indirect) ablative locative directive instrumental comitative

Tangwang -0 -0 - -xa -xa -(xa) fie -(xa) fie -(xa) fie -la -la

Dongxiang -0 -0 - -ni -t::> -s::> -r::> -yun -qala -I::>

Nominative when appearing with a verb is not marked. Example: The tree is growing. Tangwang ~31 Dongxiang muthun tree

t~:Jl24

-t~e

osw grow

continuing

-t~

The Tangwang language

877

In Tangwang, the object marker, -xa covers both direct and indirect objects. However, in Dongxiang there are -ni, the direct object marker, and -t:J, the indirect object marker. Example: I caught the thief. Tangwang vi2 24 Dongxiang pi I

tsf3-xa qUy:Ji-ni thief-obj

t~a24ttu31 -Ii;).

pari-woo grab-completed

While Tangwang has only one form, -fie, to mark ablative, locative and directive, Dongxiang has three forms, -S:J, -r:J, - yun respectively. Example 1: I came from Lanzhou. Tangwang vi224 Dongxiang pi I

IEf3t~u24-fie lant~-s:J

Lanzhou-ablative

Example 2: The sheep are eating grass on the hill. Tangwang jj53_m ~i!u~yLfie sheep(pl) hill-locative Dongxiang qoni-Ia ula-r:J sheep(pl) hill-locative

IEf3-li;). ir:rwo. come-completed t~h;4ts h;y224_t~e.

eat grass( cont) osun itfi:rt~o. grass eat(cont).

Tangwang instrumental, -la, corresponds to Dongxiang comitative, -I:J and instrumental-qala. Example 1: Children eat with spoons!(imp) Tangwang rn53 rn 53 -m ~~3~~3-la Dongxiang e'clJWos-la ~~~qala child(pl) spoon(instr)

itfi:J· eat(imp)

Example 2: Go (together) with your brother. Tangwang ni224 aka31 -la you brother(instr) Dongxiang t~w aka-I:J you brother(comit)

jP 4ta together hanthu together

t~hf.

t.f131. go :Jt~hW.

go

Pronouns The Tangwang personal pronominal system is patterned on Dongxiang but the pronominal bases are Chinese-derived. Like in Dongxiang, case suffixes are added to these bases. For example: vi224 nP24

tha24, nyal

"I", am « Chinese women) = "we" "you(sg)" "he/she/it, that one"

Pronoun plus case suffixes: mxa 1sg obj mxafie 1 sg abl v:Jia 1 sg instr or comit

878

Mei W Lee-Smith

By way of contrast, the Dongxiang pronouns show stem changes tantamount to inflexion. For example: pi mini mas;} piqala mal;}

mathan = "we two" "I" 1 sg obj 1 sg abl I sg instr 1 sg comit

pitfle

= "we"

Possessive markers

Tangwang

reflexive possessive (own) third person possessive

Dongxiang

-n;}

-n;}

-ni

-ni

Example: (you) talk to your (own) elder brother (about something). Tangwang n;224 1a224ku~4-xa-n;} Dongxiang t~Ul kaka-t:rn;} you elder brother(obj, reft poss)

~~4. }(!z i ;}Ii ;).

speak.

The third person possessive, -ni, indicates something that belongs to another third person, i.e., when a third person speakes about "his" meaning someone else's; but -n;} is used if he means "his own". In the presence of a third personal possessive marker, the third person pronoun can also be omitted. For example, flfu "wife", flfun;} "his own wife", Jzjuni "his (someone else's) wife". Verbs Voice

Tangwang -0 -ki

basic (active) causative (passive) Example: When he comes, Tangwang n'y31 that one Dongxiang h;} he

let me know. /e 53 _j come-cond

Dongxiang -0 -ya

v;;24-xa I-obj

ir:rs;}

mat;}

ni;}

come-cond

I(ind obj)

at once

tj24 t ;Jl_ki know-causative m;}tfi:r ya. know-causative

Aspect

Tangwang -li:J - xali:J, -~I (after vn)

past completed continuing incomplete, ongoing, indicative present or future repetitive, prolonged action Example 1: I have looked. Tangwang V~24 Dongxiang pi I

Dongxiang -wo

-t~e

-t§O

-Ii

-n;}

-t~r

-t~Ul

e

k h 31 -li:J. ut~:rwo.

look (past complete)

ji24xa 31 . once.

The Tangwang language

Example 2: I am looking. Tangwang vi2 24 Dongxiang pi I Example 3: I will look. Tangwang vi224 Dongxiang pi I

879

ee3l-t~£. ut~:rt~.

look (continuing) khi?l -Ii. ut~:rn:J.

look (incomplete)

Example 4: This sheep often cries. Tangwang t~jlkie3l Dongxiang :In:J m:J This one

jy3 qoni

sheep

Example 5: This dog frequently bites people. Tangwang t~jl kie 3l kou 224 Dongxiang :Jfl:J m:J nOK:Ji this one dog

xou224 _/i warata-n:J. cry (ongoing) ~~3_xa

nijl24-t~r.

khun-ni people-obj

t~o-t~w.

bite-repetitive

Verbal noun

past completed

Tangwang -xatji

Dongxiang -S:Jn

Verbal nouns in Tangwang and Dongxiang are nominal in nature and can function as nouns or adjectives (see the next example below). Converbs4

To indicate simultaneous, incomplete prolonged action: Tangwang, Example: He came on foot. Tangwang ny31 Dongxiang th:Jr:J That one

tsou224-t~r jawu-t~w

walk-simul

le5 3 -xatfi ir:rs :In come(vn)

-t~r,

Dongxiang

-t~w.

~I.

woo (past completed)

These forms are identical to those of the aspect markers, -t~r and -t~w. The converb markers and the aspect markers in both languages are semantically similar in indicating prolonged action. However, the two markers differ functionally. To indicate a time boundary, "until", "as long as", and an action no longer useful, also to indicate one action is preferred to another, "rather than": Tangwang, -thala; Dongxiang, -thala. In both languages, the two functions share the same form, -thala and -thala. The functions are distinguished by stress patterns in the sentence. When indicating a time boundary, the stress falls on the converb suffix -thala, and on the verb of the accompanying sentence. When indicating a choice of action, the stress falls on the headwords of both parts of the sentence. Example: Come here before you go to school. Tangwang fye 53ji:i l /i t/13l_'t hala Dongxiang ji:Jfiao-t:J :Jt~hw-'thala school go(cv)

t~r3l/i :Jnt:J

you

here

'le5 3 . 'ir:J. come

880

Mei W. Lee-Smith

Example: (I) rather be working than reading. Tangwang '~24-xa ni~l-tha/a Dongxiang '~-ni wan~[[[-tha/a book( obj) read( cv)

'xu:y 3-xa 'wi/i:rni work(obj)

tIP I-Ii.

tsu31 kie-/;} do (aim)

;}t~h[[[-n;}.

go (incomplete)

To indicate an action running up to a point, "after", "irrespective of' (indicates futility of the action): Tangwang, -li:Jt~r, Dongxiang, -t;}n;}, -S:JnU - -liaot~;}. Example: (You) go after the meal. Tangwang ni224 f~l-xa Dongxiang t~h[[[ putan-ni you meal( obj)

t~hj24xa-li :Jt~r

itji:rt:Jn;} eat( cv)(after)

tf'j31. ;}t~huI. go.

Example: Even if you did not teach (him), he will learn by himself. nY31 ku~l ~:fJ3n;} ./Ye53xa you not teach(cv) that one (part) man(self) learn(tr) D t~h[[[ uli;} suruKa-liaot~;} h;} koj:rn;} suru you not teach(cv) he self(refl poss) learn(tr)

T ni224 pu3 tjia24-li:Jt~r

xa31 -li. can(incomp) ~mta-n;}.

can(incomp)

Tangwang -xa as a suffix to a verb indicates transitivity ofthe verb. To indicate condition: Tangwang,

-~[[[-

-g Dongxiang, -s;}.

Example: If you were sick, I will come to see you. Tangwang nP24 pj31xa-~I v~24 nP24-xa kh~l Dongxiang t~h[[[ k:Jm:Jr:rs;} pi t~h[[[-ni ut~:r/;} you ill(vb)(cond) I you(obj) see (aim) Note: pj31 < Mandarin bing "ill". In Tangwang, to be ill is apparently regarded as person, hence the affixation of the object marker -xa to pj31.

1&3. ir:rj;} come (voluntative) an action of the sick

To indicate simultaneity of events: Tangwang, -Ii; Dongxiang, -no Example: While looking, (subject) fell asleep. Tangwang e~l-Ii e~qi Dongxiang ut~:rn ut~:rn look(coocur) look(coocur)

~j31 t~:y3-li:J.

huntbura-wo. sleep become(completed)

To indicate a purpose: Tangwang, -0; Dongxiang, -I;}. Example: I am going to see my (own) mother. Tangwang V~24 a224na24_xan;} I mother( obj)(refl) ana-n;} Dongxiang pi I mother( obj)

e~l

tIP I_Ii.

see(purp)

go(incomp)

ut~:r/;}

;}t~h[[[_ n ;}.

see(purp)

go(incomp)

Sentence Structure Like Dongxiang, Tangwang sentence structure is generally SOY. A few exceptions in SVO structure sometimes occur in short phrases and frequently used sentences. These are often whole phrases borrowed from Chinese. Occasionally, OSV word order are used for emphasis.

The Tangwang language

881

Example: A dog bit Kawan. kou224 nia224-xalia. Tangwang Ka 3Ix ffU-xa Dongxiang Kawan-ni noy;}i t~o-wo. Person's name(obj) dog bite(past complete). Note: The suffix -xa indicates transtivity of the verb ni:J2 24 . However, word order is not totally rigid in Tangwang. As the subject, object and actions are clearly marked, there is no confusion as to who does what to whom. For example, except for the first sentence where there are no markers, all of the following sentences are acceptable, and they all mean "I hit him" (past completed). x

v:J224ta224-/ia t ha 24. v:J224 t ha24-xa ta224-lia. t ha24 _xa v:J224ta224-lia. v:J2 24ta224-/ia t ha24 _xa. t ha24 _xa ta224-/ia v:J2 24.

In the first sentence, there are no subject nor object markers. It is therefore, not acceptable to Tangwang speakers although the sentence is perfectly correct in Mandarin Chinese. In this instance, the Chinese language has, grammatically and structurally, yielded to the Dongxiang influence, whereas lexically, it has largely not changed from Mandarin Chinese.

Conclusion It seems plausible to assume that Tangwang was

originally a Chinese dialect. The speakers, either in exile or escaping famine, or for some other reasons such as trading activities along the Silk Road, found themselves surrounded by Altaic languages. It is possible to postulate that in order to survive, they traded with both the Chinese and the Altaic peoples. There might even have been inter-marriages and attempts to speak each other's languages. Though originally Chinese, the Tangwang language, as centuries passed, has gradually yielded its grammatical structure to that of the Altaic, i.e., Dongxiang. The Tangwang speakers, however, still tenaciously hang on to its Chinese vocabulary and tones. Thus the language bears the image of Chinese but is structurally Altaic. In reality, it has become a hybrid of Chinese and Dongxiang. An

interesting aspect transpires that the grammatical elements, though often of Chinese origin, had all but lost their original semantic functions and tones and have become toneless. This further suggests that the concepts of these grammatical elements have their origin in a non-tonal language. When one language is taken over by another, it is common that vocabulary is the first to go. It is, therefore, somewhat unusual for Tangwang to have lost its grammatical structure before losing its vocabularies. It demonstrates a strenuous cultural attempt of the speakers to maintain their Chinese identity. It is also practical in that by keeping its Chinese vocabulary, the speakers can, albeit to a rudimentary extent, make themselves intelligible to a much larger audience.

Notes I. Dongxiang is an Altaic language of the Mongolian stock. It is a hybridized language

influenced by standard Mongolian, Chinese, and to a lesser extent, Tibetan and Turkic

882

Mei W Lee-Smith

(probably Salar and/or Uighur). Its grammatical features are basically Mongolian though somewhat simplified. 2. There are approximately 200,000 Dongxiang people in China. Most of them live in Gansu province. They are followers of Islam. Their ancestors are mostly of Mongolian and/or Han origin. 3. These are part of Chinese linguistic terminology in naming tones.

4. Converbs, a typical feature of Turkic languages, are sometimes called gerunds by linguists. They are unchangeable sentence medial verbal forms not marked for person and tense etc. which correspond to those indicated by the main verb at sentence final position. Converbs indicate successive, simultaneous and other sequential actions.

References Grousset, Rene -N. Walford (trans.) 1970 The empire of the Steppes: a history of Central Asia. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Liu Z.X. 1981 Dongxiangyu jianzhi [A brief survey of the Dongxiang language]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe. National Editorial Committee on Questions Concerning Minority Nationalities 1981 Zhongguo Shaoshu Minzu [China's minority nationalities]. Beijing: Renmin Chubanshe.

Severin, Timothy 1976 The oriental adventure-explorers of the East. Toronto: Little, Brown and Co. Todaeva B.X. 1961 Duns 'anskij jazyk [Dongxiang language], Academy of Social Sciences of the USSR, Institute of the Peoples of Asia, Moscow: Eastern Literature Publishing House. Yiblaxam A. 1985 "Gansu jingnei de Tangwanghua jilue" [A report on the Tangwang language in the Gansu area], in: Minzu yuwen 6: 3-47.

Relevant Maps Hybrid languages and contact languages: northwest China (Tangwang). Compiled by Mei W. Lee-Smith.

North China: intercommunication involving languages other than Chinese at present. Compiled by Stephen A. Wurm.

The Wutun language Mei W. Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. The Wutun area encompasses two villagesUpper and Lower Wutun-in Tongren County (also known as Rongwo), Qinghai Province. With a total population of some 2,000, the villages are situated on the east bank of Rongwo River. Other villages in the vicinity are inhabited by the Mongolian, Huihui and Tibetan peoples. For hundreds of years, the two Wutun and their surrounding villages were under the jurisdiction of a Mongolian Banner. Thus, the Wutun people were regarded as Mongols by successive regimes. However, the residents of both Wutun villages claim to be Tibetans. They speak a creolized language which is a hybrid of Chinese, Tibetan l and Mongolian 2 (in particular, Bao'an Mongolian). There is a large proportion of lexical elements based on Chinese, a smaller one based on Tibetan, and an even smaller one based on Bao'an Mongolian. The structure of the language is largely Altaic with its grammatical features closely mirroring those of Bao'an Mongolian with very strong influence from Tibetan. The function elements are predominantly based on Bao' an, and to a lesser extent on Tibetan and a few on Chinese. As there is no name for this language, and it is spoken only in and around the Wutun villages, it is convenient to refer to it as the Wutun language and its speakers the Wutun people. There are several theories regarding the origins of the Wutun people. Some experts think they were originally people of Sichuan who migrated to Qinghai, others argue that they are of Mongolian origin. Some linguists believe that the Wutun people might have come from the vicinity of today's Nanjing area. The Chinese linguist Chen Naixiong asserts that the Wutun syllables of Chinese origin have a vowel distribution resembling that of the old Nanjing dialect-indicating a substratum of Nanjing

Chinese. The Sichuan theory suggests that the Wutuns originated from a group of Muslims in Sichuan. Some of these Muslims were converted to Lamaism. The converts, for some unknown reasons, left Sichuan and settled in Wutun. Wherever these people might have come from, historical documents indicate that they were already living in Wutun in as early as 1585. It is possible to speculate that the Wutuns might have originally migrated from the Nanjing area to Sichuan where they encountered and intermarried with the local Tibetans, and were converted to Lamaism. After a few decades or even centuries, the community, whose language might have already been influenced by Tibetan to some extent, further migrated to the Wutun area. There they joined up with the Mongolian Bao'an where two-way intermarriage occurred resulting in each partner trying to acquire a knowledge of the other's language. At the same time, the entire community was further exposed to influence from the local lingua francaTibetan. Today, the Wutun language has a structure based on partially misunderstood Bao'an, its forms and syntax influenced by Tibetan, and a mixed vocabulary, of which the Chinese loanwords are without tones, and their meanings often markedly deviate from the donor language. The Wutuns do not speak Chinese but almost everyone speaks, and some can also read, Tibetan. Conversely, none of the neighbouring peoples can speak Wutun. Tibetan is the lingua franca spoken in Tongren and nearby counties where the Wutuns, the Tibetans, the Hui, some Han Chinese and the Mongols live. Apart from Chinese words, Wutun vocabulary consists of Tibetan as well as a small number of Mongolian loan-words. They are evenly distributed in every aspect of the language. For example:

884 Mei W Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm

Wutun e kha'wr tukha'lian Wa't(;he

Tibetan 01 k haw.1k ydokilplen wart(XJn

Gloss light air magnet wall

In some situations, Chinese and Tibetan words are interchangeable. Speakers are free to choose to use a Chinese-derived or a Tibetan-derived word, e.g., Chinese-derived t01]'¢ ts h:ith; (;e'thaIj

Tibetan-derived k.1lj'k ha tSa'thaIj

t~ha'xu

saIj'tian kex't¢ r!eq'tsaIj

ie't~a

w.1i't¢n ju'tsa

Gloss winter grassland school teapot scarf complicated

Complex words are formed in the following three ways: 1. Compounding by combining Chinese morphemes, on the basis of Tibetan or Mongolian concepts, e.g., Chinese guaju. guanju "widow, widower"; Tibetanj.1ks ha, Bao'an kuaxe, Wutun kuaJu. In Chinese, as in English, guanju. guaju are gender words. In Wutun, although a Chinese word has been adopted, it has become, like in Tibetan and Bao'an, a neuter. Other examples are: Wutun th;e'ma xi'th;an xui'jaIj XUl}tsnziar'me

Chinese morpheme tie + ma fei + tian shui + yang fangzi + yanmei

Gloss iron + horse (bicycle) fly + sky (aeroplane) water + lamb (fish) house + eyebrow (eave)

Mandarin zixingche feiji yu Wuyan

2. Compounding by combining one Chinese morpheme with one or more Tibetan morphemes. This kind of compounds constitutes some 5 per cent of the Wutun vocabulary, e.g., Wutun Chinese + Tibetan t¢n 'th;r¢'ma t~a 'ma'ttetsI l:ike wa

Gloss pillowcase windowsill prisoner ("reform through labour" + human indicator)

3. Combining loan-words from Tibetan with Wutun suffixes, e.g.: Tibetan ytsamo yfa t ukt(;Ol lamalalj

Wutun xtsa'iali ka'lat.1k.1 t h.1X't(;etSI 'lamalaIj'la

Gloss easy fond of decide start (ajoumey)

The Wutun language

885

There are some words that show a close resemblance to those in Monguor, Bao'an (Tongren dialect) and Tibetan, e.g., Wutun

Monguor

Bao'an

Tibetan

khe'khe ¢'r:J k:Jr tse'le 'kat:Jra

xoxu:r fur k:Jr tfa/a: kat:Jr

qlluqllur ¢r:J k:Jr tf:a/a qatara

korkor f::Jr:J k:Jr tsolo katora

Gloss snuff bottle coral blanket roll tassel wash basin

It is interesting to note that loan-words from Mongolian, Tibetan and Chinese are often borrowed in groups of words of the same categories. For example, words depicting concrete, common and down-toearth items or concepts are often borrowed from Mongolian while those depicting the more esoteric and exotic items are more often from Tibetan. Some ofthese loan-words are: Colours

From Mongolian: red, yellow, blue, white. From Tibetan: purple, orange, pink, brown. Nature

From Mongolian: earth, sky, sun, moon, star, mountain, water, wind, ice, snow, water canal. From Tibetan: light, air, fog, cloud, thunder, lightning, dew, frost, lake, wave. Body parts

From Mongolian: head, neck, chest, belly, arm, upper leg, heart, liver, lungs, kidney (mainly moving parts). From Tibetan: waist, back, forehead, cheek, brain, guts, stomach, pancreas, gall bladder (mostly immobile parts). Animals

From Mongolian: ox, horse, pig, goat, sheep, dog, wolf. From Tibetan: lion, bear, panda, fox, camel, deer. Metals

From Mongolian: gold, silver. From Tibetan: brass, tin. Numerals

All the Wutun numerals higher than 30 are borrowings from Tibetan, while smaller numbers are from Chinese. Phonetically, the Chinese-derived words have, in most cases, maintained their Chinese pronunciations to a large extent with one significant difference: the language has no tones. There are indications that suggest these words might have been tonal in the past. This is observable in some of the Chinese loanwords where traces of tones are still present. For example:

886

Mei W. Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm

Wutun 'mime 'xar;m

Chinese maP mP Han 4 ren 2

Gloss buy rice Han person

Wutun mi'me xa'r;m

Chinese mai4 mP huai4ren 2

Gloss sell rice bad person

Clearly the tone patterns have been replaced by stress patterns. This indicates the possibility that the original Wutuns did not speak Chinese, but a non-tonal language. Chinese was acquired at some stage, possibly through inter-marriage, and has been absorbed into the Wutun language. Other languages spoken in the vicinity of Wutun, e.g., Tibetan and Bao'an Mongolian, are also non-tonal. It is quite likely that when the original non-tonal Wutun speakers encountered Chinese, tones were heard and interpreted as stress.

However, minimal pairs that contrast by stress position are relatively few. Some more examples are:

Wutun 'afo 'dapo 'gandzI potsr

Gloss old man cannon duckweed woodworm scorpion

't~edzI

Gloss young man wage liver navel egg plant

Wutun a'fo dapo gan'dzI po'tsr t~e'dzI

Wutun has a (CCC)V(CC) syllable structure. Stress is free and often occurs in more than one syllable within a word.

Word order As in Mongolian and Tibetan, Wutun sentence structure is generally SOY. In Wutun, demonstratives precede the nouns as in Mongolian and Chinese, whereas numerals, and attributive adjectives generally follow the nouns as in Tibetan, though other cases have also been observed.

jGIJ

sang~

d-llJn

-d:Jg~

{fhj.-guo-lio-dZlli.

sheep three lost -vn go-complete-past-obj st The three lost sheep are completely gone (as is evident to all).

gu

hOgdzI

jidadzI

1)god~

~DlIanna

wanlan-lio-d:Jr~.

those house all past ten years make-p-sub st (I believe) all those houses were built in the past ten years.

Word formation and derivation Wutun is an agglutinative language. Its word formation follows the principles observable in Mongolian languages, i.e., suffixes are added to stem words to produce new words the meanings of which are derivations from those of the stem words. For instance, in Bao 'an, matey = "flower", adding -Ie, matey-Ie = "to blossom"; se = "water", se-Ie = "to water, to give to drink".

The Wutun language

887

Nouns Number

singular -ke - g:} < Bao'an singular marker (l))-ge « nege "one"). Wutun -g:} also functions as a topicalizer, and when added to verbal nouns, as a further nominalizer (see nominalizer below). plural-tm":}- turu < Bao'an -Ie (Dongxiang, Salar, Uighur -la, Turkic -Iar). restricted plural-t¢k:} < Chinesejige "several". r::m person

r::m-ke one person

r::m-tm":} people

r::m-t¢k:} a few persons

The Bao'an and Monguor languages, showing strong Chinese influence, are the only Mongolian languages that mark the singular and the restricted plural with special markers. No such markers occur in the other Mongolian languages. The origin of this singular and restricted plural marking in Bao'an and Monguor is probably a misunderstanding of the Chinese classifier -ge, believed by the Bao'an and Monguor speakers to indicate singular, because it sounds like the Bao'an Monguor (and general Mongolian) word for "one", n(e)ge. The Bao'an and Monguor singular marker is -(l))ge. The Bao'an restricted plural marker is -quia which seems to be an older borrowing from archaic Chinese, gi "a few", plus -la, a plural marker in Bao'an and Dongxiang, which in turn has been borrowed from UighurSalar, and from common Turkic -Ier -Iar. The concept of number markers, and their grammatical functions are identical to those of the neighbouring Bao'an. However, number markers are not obligatory in Wutun. This could be an influence by Chinese in which the marking of plurality is optional. Cases

Comparative -kanra < Chinese kan "see"+ directional -ra or possibly derived from the Tibetan comparison indicator -Ie. Such an indicator does not occur in Chinese, but is common in Tibetan and Bao'an. t¢'k:} 'k hanr a This item compare Do you sell a cheaper one?

'tsh;ant:} cheap( attrib.)

mi neg.

jr have

me? sell

Object

direct -xa - -ha - -h:} < Turkic (Salar) - ya indirect -na < Turkic, Mongolian ni, ne The direct object marker -xa and the indirect object marker -na are remarkable in showing a reverse function when compared with other languages of the area which contain similar markers. For example, Bao'an has -ne and Dongxiang -ni for the direct object, and both Tangwang and Xezhou have -xa for both direct and indirect object markers. Uighur (Salar) also has -ni for the direct object. However, in Wutun, -xa marks direct objects and -na marks indirect objects. ana nixr-ha §a-rna, nixr mother girl(dir obj) chide- simul(cv) girl As the mother chided the daughter, the daughter cried.

ku-/ia. cry-past

888 Mei W. Lee-Smith and Stephen A. Wurm

manba tsu wesi gxl.$:rna ~jyla-ma doctor yesterday evening he(ind obj) operate-simul(cv) The doctor operated on him last night (as generally known).

wanlan-ha-dzIli. do-past-obj st

-ma helps to bind together the verb and auxiliary.

Ergative

Ergative is an obligatory feature in variable Tibetan. Wutun has borrowed the concept of ergativity, applying it in a variable fashion and not categorically. Examples are the ergative form nia - Ilia of the 2nd person singular pronoun nia -Ili: 10lJ t'O-d{} tu tu nia tso-liOlJg{} mag:rdzI-dq wolf say-vn rabbit rabbit you (erg) grass-instru what-verbalizer-general present The wolf said, "rabbit, rabbit, what do you do with the grass?"

Sometimes nia - rUa can combine with -ha and function as an emphasized 2nd person singular direct object. tsiang{} gxl.${} mOha jige sie-lio-d:rg{} last time 3 sg you(dir obj) one write-p-vn-nom How long has it been since he last wrote you?

dosi-h:rli? how much time-obj-q

Distributive

Distributive -na (origin ?) when attached to a noun indicates many separate items of the same kind. In temporal situations, -na indicates many separate slots oftime within the same time frame. IJo jilian-na tso po-ma r:Jn-na me-dio-dm-{}. 1 daily( distrib) grass collect-simul(cv) people( distrib) sell-must-sub st (I believe)I must collect grass everyday to sell to people (i.e., to make a living).

Directional

-ra probably reflects the Tibetan directional, locative -la, possibly with influence from the Mongolian direction marker -ru(n) (appears as -run in Dongxiang). However, this marker is absent in Bao'an.

-g (origin ?) indicates upward movement when affixed to a verb stem. -do, (origin ?) indicates downward movement when affixed to a verb stem.

rU a ~a you where from Where did you come from? ~{}fhy-li:rd{}

t~jand{}

shoot out(past vn) arrow(dative) (It) went up like a shooting arrow.

IH:-li:J? come-past m{}nts{} appearance

tfh;-ma go-simul(cv)

njan-~I-li:J.

drive out-upwards-past

The Wutun language

do-da fall-downwards (It) fell down.

xa down

889

t9 hl"-lia. go-past

Instrumental

-liank:1 < ? + Tibetan instrumental-ge 1)8 (a'tsI-liank:1 IT 1 knife-instru meat 1 cut the meat with a knife.

ts'ie-t:1 cut(vn)

jr. to be

Locative

-Ii < Chinese Ii tJ:r1i = in the house; xotsotJ:r1i = in the shop; ku-li = at that moment (time). Nominalizer

-g:1 (origin? see Nouns-Number above) always follows the verbal noun marker -t;} «Chinese de) to strengthen its function. Sometimes the adding of -g:1 can produce a full noun. tsiang:1 g:x1~:1 niaha jige sie-lio-d:rg;} last time 3sg you(dir obj) one write-p-vn-nom How long has it been since he last wrote you?

dosi-h:rli? how much time-obj-q

Possessive (genitive)

-t;} - -d;}. The possessive (or genitive) case marker -t:1 and the locative -Ii also occur in Chinese, though not as case endings. Tibetan locative, directional, -/ a may also have some influence on the locative -Ii. 1)8 = "I" 1)8-t:1 = "mine" Pronouns Persons

Singular

Plural

1)am8, 1)amu < Tibetan 1)a "I" + Chinese -men; 1)o1)t(:i < Tibetan 1)a (rang)-tso; 1)o1)t(:ig:1 - 1)ot(:ig:1 "I a few = we"; t(:ig:1 < Chinese jige "several". nim8 < Chinese nimen; 2 ni -lli- nia-llia(object form) < Chinese ni + object marker -xa nid~ < Ch ni + Tibetan plural pronoun marker, (IlIa sometimes also functions as an t(:i < Chineseji(ge); ergative marker) nid~g:1 < Ch ni jige "you several". gu "that" k:1t~e, g:1d¥e k:1t~e (t¢k:1) "he several" < Tibetan k 'ongtso, 3 < Tibetan k'ong(tso) k'on-ttJO + Chinesejige "several"; (see example under gut(:ik:1 "they several". Nominalizer -g:1) 3dual k:1t~elia1)k;} "he two"; lia1)k;} ku-t(:ik:1 "two that a few". liagk:1 < Chinese liangge "two". Pronouns take the same case suffixes as nouns, e.g., 1)8-te "my" (1)a - 1)8 + genitive (possessive) suffix. 1)a - 1)0 -

1)8
Beauval > Buffalo Narrows> Pinehouse > Green Lake The origin of these people is not all clear. Some have links to Red River, but in general it seems to be an independent development, both historically and linguistically. Metis French.

The French language as it is still spoken by the Metis (and by some few Indians on the reserves in the West, always of advanced age) is readily distinguishable from any other variety of French. Although historically derived from Quebecois French, and possibly Acadian French, it has undergone a different evolution, being isolated from its Quebec roots and coexisting with Cree and Ojibwe and now English. This French dialect was discussed by Papen (1984a, b) and Douaud (1980, 1982, 1985, 1989). This French dialect differs from other Canadian French dialects in a number of respects. It must be mentioned that not all of these differences can consistently be found in all speech of the Metis. Many speakers have been to French schools or have otherwise been in contact with standard Canadian French, which had some influence on their speech. Although Metis French is readily distinguishable from all other varieties of Canadian French, it remains a French dialect, with only a few syntactic and morphological differences and a number of conspicuous phonological differences. Semantically and syntactically, there are a few minor differences between Canadian French and

1176

Peter Bakker and Robert A. Pap en

Metis French, such as a different possessive construction (French has Ie cheval a Pierre "Pierre's horse" (literally 'the horse to Pierre'), Michif Pierre son cheval, literally "Pierre his horse", cf. Douaud 1985 and Papen 1984b:129), and the loss of gender distinction in pronouns (as i « it) and a « elle), and even ra 'it', are used for men and women). There are also lexical differences and phonological differences. Metis French differs lexically from other Canadian French dialects. Although the bulk of the lexicon is also known in conservative Western Canadian, Quebecois or Acadian French dialects, some lexical items seem to be typically Metis: boulet (lbulEI for 'ankle' (it means 'fetlock' in standard French), ponque Ip6k/ for 'rectum' (possibly related to the Ojibwe word for farting boogidi?), etc. A number of Michif words of French origin have meanings which differ from those which they have in other dialects, e.g. French taureau 'bull', Metis French I tu:nt: I 'pemmican', F. cerise 'cherry', M. sriz '[certain] berry' (Papen 1984b). Furthermore, all Metis French dialects contain a number of Cree or Ojibwe words, in number and kind differing from place to place, and even one Assiniboine word pizm 'gopher'. Phonologically, there are also a few differences between Metis French and Canadian French, but these are so frequent and salient that these make a speaker of Metis French readily recognizable as such. The most obvious difference is 'mid vowel raising', whereby the French mid vowels lei, 101 and 101 have merged with the French high vowels Iii, Iyl and lui respectively, especially in open syllables. For instance the French words l'eau [10] and loup [lu] have become homophones in Michif ([Iu]). Another difference between Metis French and Canadian French is that the dental stops are realized as palato-alveolar affricates before front vowels in Metis French, whereas they are realized as palatal affricates in other Canadian French dialects. The stops It! and Id/ are pronounced [c] and [dz] before front vowels in Metis French. In Quebecois French these plosives also become affricates, but [t S] and [d Z ] rather than palato-

alveolar. These are the most conspicuous differences. Other are the merger (especially within one word) of lsi and lsi, the presence of a flapped Irl in Metis French instead of the uvular Irl and a few others. For some of these Metis French features it is clear that they are due to an Amerindian substrate: in Algonquian languages lui and 101 are allophones of one phoneme, as are lsi and I~/, but for other phenomena it is less clear. All of these features of Metis French are also present in the French part of Michif. Metis Plains Cree Cree as it is spoken by the Metis also seems to differ in some ways from the Cree as spoken on the reserves, although it is not evident that this was always so. Nevertheless, these differences are readily acknowledged by the Metis. Douaud (1985 :85), for instance, cites one of his Metis informants about his language: "It's not good Cree, not like on the reserves." At this stage of our knowledge of Cree dialects, it is not possible to say with any degree of certainty which features are to be considered as typical of Metis Cree. It might be that Metis Cree tends to be more analytical than Indian Cree. A sentence like "he takes it for him" which on the reserve would be

(la)

otin-am-aw-6'w take-TI-IO-3->3' take-it-for.him-he

would be rendered in Metis Cree as: (1 b)

otin-am wiya kici take-TA-l->4 him namely take-it-(he) him for

where a postpositional phrase (the postposition is derived from an adverb meaning "namely") replaces a verb morpheme. Similar changes have also been noted elsewhere in the Cree as used by Metis. A study of further differences between Cree as spoken by the Metis and Cree as spoken by the

Michif and other languages of the Canadian Metis

Indians (e.g. in the passive constructions) remains to be undertaken. Metis Swampy Cree Swampy Cree is a dialect of Cree which is distinguished from other dialects in that it has InJ for Proto-Algonquian *1. Plains Cree, for instance, has Iy/. Swampy Cree has been very little studied, and the variety as spoken by the Metis in Northern Manitoba is virtually unknown (as is, by the way, Indian Swampy Cree). The speech of one woman with whom Bakker worked briefly in 1990 was characterized by a great number of English lexical borrowings and more analytic constructions like those reported on in the section on Metis Plains Cree. Metis Saulteaux (Ojibwa) Our information about Metis Saulteaux (Canadian Ojibwe) as opposed to Indian Saulteaux is both scanty and contradictory. In Manitoba, a significant number of Metis speak Saulteaux as their aboriginal language. Some Saulteaux speakers claim that the Indian version of the language and the Metis version are recognizably different. Our knowledge of the language is almost nil, so we had to rely on the judgment of others. We tested it with one Saulteaux speaking Indian from Central Manitoba who had a lot of Saulteaux speaking Metis (and Saulteaux) friends and acquaintances. We had him listen to tape recordings of Metis who spoke Saulteaux and he rightly identified the speakers as Metis without any hesitation. A linguist with a good knowledge of Ojibwe, however, could not discern any difference. In the Metis community Camperville, which borders on the Saulteaux reserve Pine Creek, Saulteaux is spoken beside Michif. Local people remark that the Saulteaux of the reserve does not differ from the Saulteaux spoken in the Metis community. However, as there is considerable intermarriage, it is very likely that in this community the indigenous language Michif was ousted by the Saulteaux language from the reserve, so that it is indeed the same language in both of these communities.

1177

In 1985 the Manitoba Metis Federation organized a meeting on the languages of the Metis. At this meeting Metis Saulteaux was one of the Metis languages discussed, and treated as a distinct language (Michif Languages Committee 1985). In short, the conjecture that Metis Saulteaux is different in some marked ways from Indian Saulteaux, could not be confirmed or disconfirmed due to lack of information. More research is necessary on this subject matter. Bungi: the Scottish dimension Bungi (lbagi/) is the name of a language as well of an Indian tribe and apparently also for people of mixed ancestry. In 1817 Edward Chappell writes about an Indian from Red River: "As far as I could collect, his tribe are properly called the Sotees [Saulteaux], or people who go up and down the falls of rivers. But they have been styled Bongees by the British, from their being addicted to mendacity; and as they are always crying out "Bongee!" which, in their tongue, signifies 'a little'." (Chappell 1817: 199) This is very close to what Peter Fidler wrote in his General report of the Manetoba District for 1820: Bungees or Soteaux ... obtained the name of Bungees by us from the word Bungee in their language signifying small or little which they so frequently repeated when their supplies was not adequate for their wants, that they have thus obtained the word as a fixed term to the whole tribe. These Indians are not originally natives of these Parts, but were first introduced by the North West Company about the year 1797-before this there were very few Straglers-they being then Industreous they was induced by the Reports of the Canadians that Beavers abounded here & was invited to leave their original Lands about the rain lake & the Western borders of Lake Superior-now they finding this Country so much more plentiful in Provisions than their own & the Beaver

1178

Peter Bakker and Robert A. Pap en

being then plentiful-they have become quite habituated to these parts & I believe will never return to their own lands again. (Johnson 1967: 6, n. 2) In the Edmonton House Journals Bungees were already mentioned for August 9, 1795 (Johnson 1967: 6, n. 2). The earliest mentions of the name Bungee date from 1759 and 1741, both from the Hudson Bay Company (HBC) records of York Factory (Stobie 1967-68: 66, n. 4). Up into this century, that term denoted a Manitoban subdivision of the Ojibwes. Simms (1906) equates the 'Bungees' with 'Swampy Indians' at Lake Winnipeg. Howard (1965) equates the Bungee with the Plains Ojibwe. In linguistics, the name Bungee (or Bungi) has another meaning again: here it is a variety of English with some Cree and Ojibwe admixture. Only a handful of people still speak Bungee. Blain's studies (1987, 1989) show that most of them are ashamed to speak it; it is associated with the discriminated group of Natives. For its speakers, the word 'Bungee' seems to mean primarily 'Native', not a particular language. One of Blain's informants defined B ungee as "someone who is half Indian and half Canadian or Icelandic, or something." (Blain 1989:256). Nevertheless, the few linguistic studies there are, show that this language is best characterized as a dialect of English (Blain 1987, 1989; Walters 1969-1970), here and there interspersed with some Cree (from different dialects) and Ojibwe words (cf. Blain 1989: 309-320). The language is associated with the Lower Red River Settlement (Blain 1987), probably more in particular with the parish of Saint Andrews, where Hudson Bay Company (HBC) traders with their Native families had retired. The fathers were often speakers of Gaelic (with English as a second language), or Orkney English, whereas the mothers were probably Cree and Ojibwe speakers (Stobie 1967-1968: 69). Blain's (1989) thorough study of what could still be recovered of Bungee, shows that it is an English dialect, with some phonological substratal influence from Cree, Gaelic, Scottish English and

Orkney English. She concludes her study with: "The most prominent and salient features of Bungee are indeed its sounds. Aside from a handful of grammatical features, voice quality seems to be the most 'marked' feature; ( ... )." (Blain 1989: 210) It is therefore neither a mixed language nor a new language, but an English dialect associated with retired HBC fur traders and their Native families and their descendants. Brayet: Ojibwe and French? A language which is now extinct as far as we know and about which information would be most welcome, is Brayet. This language is supposed to be a mixture of Saulteaux (a dialect of Ojibwe, Algonquian) and French formerly spoken around the Great Lakes. Our only source is Stobie (1970), who says: "[Bungee] has its French counterpart in Braillais, which grew up between Saulteau [sic] and Quebecois along the southern trade route from Sault Ste. Marie through the Lake of the Woods passage and on west." The Brayet language is mentioned again in Stobie (1971) as being a mixture of French and Ojibwe. The quote from Stobie suggests that this may have been a predecessor of Michif. Unfortunately she does not give any source, neither for the name, nor for the general information. It is not known how Ojibwe and French were mixed, nor do we know where and when. We have no language data at all, and all we know are one or two 20th century side-references in work by Stobie on the Bungee language, who does not specify her sources. The etymology of the name is the only clear thing about Brayet. It is derived from the French word braguette meaning 'breech-clout'. In northwestern Saskatchewan Metis French it has also taken the derived meanings 'Indian' and 'diaper'. This French word must have been part of the vocabulary of the English speaking North West Company fur traders in that area at least, since the English River Book gives 'a Bryette' as the translation for the given Cree word assesian 'breech-clout' (Duckworth 1990: 6). Northwest

Michif and other languages of the Canadian Metis

Company men also received 'braillets' as part of their equipment and clothing (Innis 1970: 244). There are a few independent substantiations. A mixture of French and Ojibwe is also mentioned by Peterson (1981: 178-179) referring to the Metis of the Great Lakes around 1800. The final bit of information which may be useful is the (oral) information from a Minnesota Metis (1990) that his now deceased grandfather spoke a mixture of French and Indian which, in his own view, was 'very different' from Michif (as judged from examples in the Michif dictionary of LaverdureAllard 1983). No further data on this language are known to us. Finally one remark which relates to this. Thomas (1985: 248) writes the following in a comment on a paper on Michif: Michif, as he describes it, appears to be basically Cree-Ojibwa in structure but with a sizable French vocabulary, particularly in nouns. I have heard of areas where the opposite process has taken place, that is, where the language is French in structure but Ojibwa in content. The language spoken by a large part of the population on the Garden River Ojibwa reserve near Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is such an example. When Bakker tried to verify this on this reservation in 1987, he was unable to find any trace of a mixed language. A man in his nineties knew some French, but he denied the existence of such a mixture, and so did an anthropologist who had made a study of this reserve. We have serious doubts about the existence of the mixed language Thomas describes, now or in the past. Mitis English English should also be mentioned here. Virtually all speakers of Michif are also fluent in English. In fact, most of them nowadays speak English as their only everyday language. Many Canadian Metis (and Cree) have a particular accent in their English. The pressure of English is quite great and it has had a pervasive influence on Metis French. English words used in Michif sometimes

1179

retain their original pronunciation, and sometimes they show phonological adaptation. For example Ie siding [sajdIl)], un black eye [bl rekaj] , Ie cutter [kAdar], but la steam [scim], lafactory [frektri]. In English spoken by Cree Indians and Metis, the same confusion of gender exists as for Metis French: 'he' and 'she' are used for both men and women--even by some with a university degree. Metis Multilingualism The above information on Metis languages must not be interpreted as meaning that the Metis were or are monolingual. In fact, there is a long tradition of Metis multilingualism, even before the massive acquisition of English and the shift towards this language. As examples, we give some quotes from historical sources commenting on Metis multilingualism, their abilities as interpreters and also code-mixing. James Hargrave, a Hudson's Bay Company clerk, remarks the following about a Metis ferryman at the Red River forks, by the name of McDougall (Hargrave 1871: 184): "The name of the ferryman is Duncan Mcdougall. He is a linguist, being competent to speak English, French, Cree and Gaelic, and in consequence of his abilities and usefulness as an interpreter, ought long before his present time of life to have occupied a good position." Authors mention French, Ojibwe (=Chippewa) and Cree as languages of the Red River settlement. In 1849 the French Catholic priest G.A. Belcourt mentioned Chippewa, Cree and French, but French is spoken less than the Indian languages: "I have already opened two schools for the instruction of the half-breeds; one in French and the other in Chippewa, for these tongues, conjointly with the Cree, are the only ones now in use here, and even the French is not much spoken." (Wood 1850: 43) As for language mixing (code-mixing), the following description is typical: "Vital, our buffalo hunter, alone spoke very bad English. He succeeded in intermixing French, English and Cree to a degree unequalled by any person of my acquaintance." (Erasmus 1976: 67 about the 1850s, cited in Douaud 1985: 30)

1180

Peter Bakker and Robert A. Papen

Even today, many Metis speak more than one language (beside English, which is spoken by virtually all today). Conclusions The Metis are an ethnic group which is not defined by a common language-although some do speak a language which is only spoken by this group, Michif, which is particular to the Metis and in its kind of mixture unique in the world. Perhaps they are an ethnic group not because of the language they speak, but because of the variety of languages they speak. In fact, their

(traditional) multilingualism may be one of the distinctive ethnic traits of the Metis. In part their multilingualism may have been an inheritance of their French ancestors the voyageurs, who generally spoke one or more Amerindian languages, and also mixed them: "They [the voyageurs coming to Red River] are generally great talkers, have long yarns to tell, and are not over scrupulous in their narrations, which are made up of an almost unintelligible jargon of the English. French and Indian languages." (A. Ross 1856 [1962]:79)

References Bakker, Peter 1989 "Bibliography of Metis languages (Michif, Metis French, Metis Cree, Bungi)", Amsterdam Creole Studies 10:41-47. 1991 "The Ojibwe element in Michif', in W. Cowan (ed.), Papers of the Twentysecond Algonquian Conference 11-20. Ottawa: Carleton University. 1992 "A Language of our Own". The Genesis of Michif-the Mixed Cree-French language of the Canadian Metis. Dissertation, Amsterdam (to appear with Oxford University Press, 1995). Barkwell, Lawrence J.-David N. Gray-Ron H. Richard-David N. Chartrand-Lyle Longclaws 1989 "Languages spoken by the Metis", Appendix 4 to: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.-Submission to the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. Research and Analysis of the Impact of the Justice System on the Metis. Winnipeg: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. Blain, Eleanor 1987 "Speech of the Lower Red River Settlement", in W. Cowan (ed.), Papers of the 18th Algonquian Conference, 7-16. Ottawa: Carleton University. 1989 The Bungee dialect of the Red River Settlement. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Winnipeg.

Chappell, Edward 1817 Narrative ofa Voyage to Hudson's Bay in his Majesty's Ship Rosamond (. .. ). London: J. Mawman. Community of Ile-a-Ia-Crosse 1990 Community Michef Retention Project. Unpublished Paper. Crawford, John C. 1983. "Speaking Michif in four Metis communities", Canadian Journal of Native Studies 3:47-55. Douaud, Patrick C. 1980 "Metis: a case of triadic linguistic economy", Anthropological Linguistics 22:392-414. 1982 "All mixed: Canadian Metis sociolinguistic patterns", Sociolinguistics Working Paper 101. Austin: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. 1985 Ethnolinguistic Profile of the Canadian Metis. Ottawa: National Museum of Man, Mercury Series No.99. 1989 "Mitchif: un aspect de la Francophonie Albertaine", The Journal of Indigenous Studies 1(2):69-79. Duckworth, Henry 1990 The English River Book. A North West Company journal and account Book. Montreal etc.: McGill Queen's University Press.

Michif and other languages a/the Canadian Metis

Dusenberry, Verne 1985 "Waiting for a day that never comes: the dispossessed Metis of Montana", Ill: Peterson-Brown (eds.), 119-136. Erasmus, P. 1976 BuffaLo days and nights. Calgary: Glenbow Institute. Fredeen, Shirly M. 1991 Sociolinguistic survey of indigenous languages in Saskatchewan: on the critical list. Saskatoon: Saskatchewan Indigenous Languages Committee. Giraud, Marcel 1945 Le Metis Canadien. Son role dans l'histoire des Provinces de ['Ouest. Paris: Institut d'Ethnologie. Hargrave, Joseph James 1871 Red River. Montreal: John Lovell. Hewson, John 1983 "The speech of nations", Canadian Journal of Linguistics 28:33-46. Howard, James H. 1965 "The Plains-Ojibwa or Bungi: hunters and warriors of the northern prairies. With special reference to the Turtle Mountain Band", South Dakota Museum Anthropology Papers 1. Vermillion. Reprinted 1977, Reprints in Anthropology 7. Lincoln, Nebraska: J. and L. Reprint Co. Innis, Harold A. 1970 The fur trade in Canada . Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Johnson, Alice M. (ed.) 1976 Saskatchewan journals and correspondence: Edmonton House, 17951800; Chesterfield House, 1800-1802. London: The Hudson's Bay Record Society. Laverdure, P.-I.R. Allard 1983 The Michif dictionary. Turtle Mountain Chippewa Cree. Winnipeg: Pemmican Publications. Michif Languages Committee 1985 Michif languages conference. June 26, 27 & 28, 1985. Winnipeg, Manitoba. Committee Report. Manitoba: The Michif Languages Committee.

1181

Papen, Robert A. 1984a "Un parler fran t demonstrate that Aymara, not Quechua, was the vehicle of diffusion in this case. Pre-Aymaran interlingual contacts in the Titicaca basin The distribution of vocabulary items in languages of the Titicaca basin and languages of the tropical lowlands north of Lake Titicaca suggests cultural and lexical borrowing antedating the arrival of the Aymaran invaders. A very suggestive case is the word tara for 'maize', which is found in the Chipaya language of the Bolivian altiplano and in Moseten, an unrelated lowland language. To the west of the Moseten-speaking area two other languages have similar forms, Arawakan Apolista with ta or fay and genetically independent Leco with ta. Another interesting case is Uru-Chipayan soiii 'human being'; compare Moseten-Chimane suiii. Modern Uru-Chipayan is rich in Aymaran loans, such as the nominal plural suffix -naka in Chipaya or the Uru word for 'lake' qota (Aymara quta). Coastal trade language Almost no information is available about the linguistic situation that prevailed in the central part of the Pacific coastal area of Peru at the arrival of the Spaniards. Early sources mention the existence of a special 'fishermen's language' or lengua pescadora. It may have been identical to Quingnam, an undocumented extinct language originally spoken near the town of Trujillo and

1332

Willem F.R. Adelaar

along the coast as far south as Lima. An unusual marine term points at probable interregional language contacts between fishing populations along the Pacific coast: eommi 'seal' in the extinct Mochica or Yunga language of the northern coast (Chiclayo) is obviously related to thome 'seal', which has been recorded in the 16th century for

the Central Peruvian coastal dialect of Quechua. The initial th represents an exotic sound (pronunciation unknown) in this variety of Quechua. The Araucanian (Chilean) term for 'seal' is lnr ({is an interdental lateral), which could be related as well.

References Hardman, M. 1966 laqaru: outline of phonological and morphological structures. The Hague. Torero, A.

1987 "Lenguas y pueblos altiphmicos en torno al siglo XVI" [Languages and peoples of the Altiplano at the turn of the 16th century], Revista Andina 5:329-405.

Relevant maps Aymaran and coastal Tupi-Guarani: historical. Compiled by Willem F.H. Adelaar. Map 138. Aymaran languages and Quechua. Compiled by Willem F.H. Adelaar. Map 140.

Western South America: historical. Compiled by Willem F.H. Adelaar. Map 141.

Araucanian, a language of intercultural communication in the Southern Andes Willem F. H. Adelaar The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. At the arrival of the Spanish conquerors, Araucanian was the dominant, if not the only, language spoken in central Chile, the non-insular part of southern Chile and the island of Chiloe. A grammar of the language was published as early as 1606 by Valdivia. It was referred to as 'The General Language of the Kingdom of Chile' (La lengua general del Reino de Chile). The modem name of the language is Mapudungun ('language of the [people of the] land') by analogy with Mapuche ('people of the land'), as the Araucanians are generally called. During the Spanish colonial presence, central Chile and the far south (Valdivia, Chiloe) were under European control, but the Araucanian heartland situated in the intervening area (induding modem Arauco, Bio-Bio, Malleco and Cautin) remained independent, as the Araucanians fiercely resisted every attempt at dominating them. Not before the end of the 19th century were the Araucanians forced to submit to the Chilean national forces. Spanish religious authorities used the Araucanian language in order to subdue and evangelize non-Araucanian peoples, such as the Chonos of the islands south of Chil6e, to the Christian faith. At the same time, the independent Araucanians of the Araucanian heartland colonized large areas of present-day Argentina, on their way linguistically assimilating many of the local tribes. The Araucanian expansion was arrested by the extermination campaigns waged against the Indians by consecutive Argentinian governments during the 19th century. At present, Araucanian speakers can be found in the four Chilean provinces of the Araucanian heartland (in particular, Malleco and Cautin), but also further south in Llanquihue, Osorno, Valdivia and possibly Chiloe. A substantial part of

the Mapuche population (mostly acculturated) live in Santiago de Chile. Araucanian speakers also live in Patagonia, in the Argentinian provinces of Chubut, Neuquen, La Pampa and Rio Negro. There are a few communities of Araucanian speakers as far east as the province of Buenos Aires. The actual Araucanian language area is remarkably free of dialectal diversity. There are few linguistic differences between Chilean and Argentinian Araucanian, the most divergent dialect being that of the Huilliche ("people of the South") in the southernmost part of the Chilean Araucanian-speaking area. Mapudungun still has a substantial number of speakers in Chile, estimated at 400,000 to half a million. Huilliche is moribund. Argentinian speakers of Araucanian are estimated at 40,000. Like Quechua and Aymara, Araucanian is a suffixing agglutinating language. Its morphology is almost as regular and transparent. Nominal morphology, however, is not very elaborate. There are no case affixes and person-ofpossession is indicated by means of prefix-like possessive pronouns. Like other languages of the southern tip of South America (Yahgan, Tehuelche, Giiniinakiine), Araucanian distinguishes three numbers (singular, dual and plural) in its personal reference system. It has a true morphological passive, which is used with great frequency. Word order is SVO, the structure nominative-accusative. A possessive marker precedes the head of a possessive construction. Phonologically, Araucanian is richer than the languages of the Middle Andes. It has six vowels, five nasals and an interesting contrast between alveolar and interdental n, I, t, which has not been preserved in all present-day dialects. Oratorical

1334

Willem F.R. Adelaar

qualities, highly esteemed among the traditional Araucanians, gave rise to a rich and voluminous oral literature. The existence of the word toki 'stone axe', a symbol of authority for traditional Araucanians, has been treated as evidence for a possible Araucanian-Polynesian contact by J. Imbelloni ("La premiere chaine isoglossematique oceanoamericaine; Ie nom des haches lithiques".

Reference Salas, A. 1992 "Lingiiistica mapuche. Gufa bibliognifica" [Mapuche linguistics. A bibliographical guide], Revista Andina 10: 473-537.

Relevant map The Araucanian language. Compiled by Willem F. H. Adelaar. Map 139.

Festschrift W. Schmidt, MOdling, 1928) and others. Toki means 'stone axe' in Eastern Polynesian (Easter Island toki, Hawaiian ko'i pohaku). The case is not nearly as convincing as that of the 'sweet potato' (kumara; see the text Quechua, a language of intercultural communication in the Middle Andes by W. F. H. Adelaar in this Atlas).

Media Lengua in Ecuador Pieter Muysken The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. The variety of Media Lengua (ML, lit. 'half language' or 'halfway language') described here is spoken natively by at least about a thousand people in Central Ecuador. The references are summarised in Muysken (to appear). Other varieties have been discovered in Sarajuro (Province of Loja) and outside of Caiiar, both in the southern part of the Ecuadorian highlands. Nature of the mixture and structure Linguistically speaking, Media Lengua is essentially Quechua (Q) with the vast majority of its stems replaced by Spanish (S) forms. Examples of Media Lengua (ML) utterances are given in (1) through (3), with the (b) examples giving the regional Quechua equivalent, and the (c) examples the regional Spanish equivalent. Abbreviations in the interlinear translations of all examples:

AC BN CI FN ill PR SD 10 1

accusative, direct object benefactive (for), purposive (in order to) cis locative (movement towards speaker) finite norninalizer locative progressive sudden/discovery tense topic marker first person subject

(l)a. unu fabur-ta pidi-nga-bu bini-xu-ni (ML) one favour-AC ask-FN-BN come-PR-l 'I come to ask a favour.' b. shukfabur-da mana-nga-bu shamu-xu-ni (Q) c. vengo para pedir un favor (S)

noted. First, we get an emphatic form of the indefinite article in Media Lengua, unu, rather than Spanish unemphatic un. Second, the Spanish irregular verb form vengo appears in a regularised stem form bini. Third, the Quechua rule voicing the accusative case marker -ta to -da after fabur has not applied in Media Lengua; Quechua dialectological evidence suggests that this is a recent rule. Fourth, what is peculiar about Media Lengua is not so much that it contains Spanish words (many dialects of Quechua do as well), but that all Quechua words, including all core vocabulary, have been replaced. Fifth, the Spanish forms have been adapted phonologically to Quechua; mid vowels have been replaced by high vowels. Quechua word order and morphology have been retained. kuyi-buk yirba nuwabi-shka (ML) cavia-BN grass there.is.not-SD 'There turns out to be no grass for the cavias.' b. kuyi-buk k'iwa illa-shka (Q) c. No hay hierba para los cuyes (S)

(2)a.

Note that the Quechua word kuyi 'guinea pig' appears in the local Spanish as well. The Media Lengua verb maintains the Quechua-specific 'sudden discovery tense' marking -shka. The Quechua negative existential verb stem illa- has been relexified with a newly formed 'frozen' stem nuwabi-, derived from Spanish no and haber 'have'. The Spanish verb 'have' has an impersonal form hay which also has existential meaning. yo-ga awa-bi kay-mu-ni (ML) 1-10 water-LO fall-CI-l 'I come after falling into the water.' b. nuka-ga yaku-bi urma-mu -ni (Q) c. vengo despues de caer en el agua (S)

(3)a.

It is clear that (la) has resulted from putting the phonological shapes of the word in (1c) into the lexical entries in (1b). Thus shuk is replaced by unu, maiia- by pidi-, etc. Several things should be

1336

Pieter Muysken

Examples such as (3) show the extent to which Media Lengua utilizes the possibilities of Quechua verbal affixation. Cislocative -mu can be attached to non-movement verb stems indicating that the subject comes after some action. This possibility exists in both Media Lengua and Quechua. What examples (1) to (3) illustrate is that: (a)

(b)

(c) (d) (e)

(f)

Media Lengua is essentially the product of replacing the phonological shapes of Quechua stems with Spanish forms, maintaining the rest of the Quechua structure; the Spanish forms chosen have undergone regularization and adaptation to Quechua morphophonology; Media Lengua is conservative in sometimes reflecting earlier stages in Quechua pronunciation; it is not made up on the spot every time it is spoken; the occurrence of Spanish strong alternants, frozen composites, etc. is an indication that we do not have a simple process of vocabulary replacement here; the Quechua and Spanish that have contributed to Media Lengua have influenced each other in other ways as well.

Media Lengua phonology resembles that of Quechua, so that Spanish words are often adapted. Since we are concerned with the fate of the Spanish words in Media Lengua, when incorporated into a predominantly Quechua phonology, the most important differences involve elements or combinations of elements present in Spanish but not in Quechua. The voiced stops [b], [d], and [g] occur in Quechua primarily in loans from Spanish and from unidentified Amerindian substrate languages. In addition, they can result from rules that voice initial consonants of affixes. We find that e and 0 are often, but not always, pronounced as i and u, respectively (with some variation that also occurs in the Quechua pronunciation of Spanish loans). The Spanish vowels [e] and [0] are often retained in names and interjections. In stressed position [e] and [0] are

more frequently retained than in unstressed position.

Processes of genesis Media Lengua probably came into existence because acculturated Indians could not identify completely with either the traditional rural Quechua culture or the urban Spanish culture. Thus, it was not communicative needs that led to it, but rather expressive needs. It appears that ethnic self-identification is of crucial importance in determining the relation between Quechua, Media Lengua and Spanish in the Ecuadorian Highlands. Media Lengua is not the product of an interlanguage arrested and fixed, resulting from an emergency contact situation, but rather it is a departure from Quechua through massive relexification, and not at all along the path of Quechua-Spanish interlanguage. The Ecuadorian capital of Quito went through a phase of rapid expansion in the period between 1905 and 1925, after the railway linking it to the Pacific port of Guayaquil had been built. Many of the construction workers were recruited in the provinces south of the capital, where also the speakers of Media Lengua are to be found. The variety reported on here is spoken about two kilometers from a station on this railway. While now it has lost its importance, the influence of the railway station after the tum of he century and its pulling effect on the Indian labourers must have been tremendous, and there is a long history of cyclical migration to the capital. It is not at all unlikely that Media Lengua emerged as a result of the migration to the capital, among the young adult males who were suddenly much more affluent and independent than their peasant relatives, and suddenly confronted with a Hispanic urban society.

Wider social context The Media Lengua-speaking communities studied here and located on the fringe of a Quechuaspeaking area, to which the community historically belonged. Due to its geographical

Media Lengua in Ecuador

situation and due to the necessity for and possibility of its inhabitants to make frequent trips to the capital to look for work, the community has come to be culturally differentiated from neighbouring areas to the extent that its people find it necessary to set themselves apart from the neighbours. Media Lengua is not used with outsiders, but neither is it a secret language. Rather it is an ordinary, day to day community-level form of communication.

1337

Language acquisition aspects Media Lengua is either learned as a first language or, now that language shift towards Spanish is more advanced, as a second language, in any case before Quechua. Only the oldest generation may still have Quechua as its first language, but everyone has some knowledge of Media Lengua. Many people now in their early middle age are frequently trilingual in Quechua, Media Lengua and Spanish. Some older people have less fluent Spanish, many younger people only rudimentary Quechua.

References Muysken, Pieter 1979 "La mezc1a entre quechua y castellano" [The mixture between Quechua and Spanish], Lexis 3/1 :41-56. Lima. 1980 Sources for the study of Amerindian contact vernaculars in Ecuador. Amsterdam Creole Studies III. 1981 "Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: the case for relexification", in: R.W. Anderson (ed.), Second languages. A crosslinguistic perspective. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury. 1986 "Contactos entre Quichua y Castellano en el Ecuador" [Contacts between Quechua and

Relevant map Contact languages: Ecuador and Bolivia (Media lengua). Compiled by Pieter Muysken. Map 142.

Spanish in Ecuador], in: S.E. Moreno Yanez (ed.), Memorias del Primer Simposio Europeo sobre Antropologfa del Ecuador, 377-451. Quito: Ediciones Abya-Yala. 1988 "Lexical restructuring and creole genesis", in: N. Boretzky et al. (eds.), Akten des 4. Kolloquiums aber Sprachkontakt, 193210. Bochum: Brockmeyer. 1989 "Media Lengua and linguistic theory", Canadian Journal of Linguistics 33: 409-422. to appear "Media Lengua", in: S.G. Thomason (ed.), Non-Indo-European-based pidgins and creoles. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Callahuaya in Bolivia Pieter Muysken The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. Callahuaya (also spelled Kallawaya, Callawaya) or Machaj juyay 'language of the people, the family', is spoken in a region of northwest Bolivia, northeast of Lake Titicaca, by the older members of a group of 2000 itinerant healers, all male. The centre of the Callahuaya healers, who also work in the capital La Paz and travel widely in South America, is Charazani. Processes of genesis We can assume that probably the mixed language Callahuaya emerged at some point during the process of shift in the region from Puquina to Quechua. The curing rituals required a secret language' while the increased radius of action of the curers (through the whole Quechua-speaking Andes) made a Quechua-based secret language desirable (so that to someone overhearing it would sound like Quechua). Callahuaya has a word of its own for elements of Spanish origin where Aymara and Quechua have a borrowing. This suggests at least lexical elaboration during the Colonial or Republican periods. The group of healers is first mentioned in 1764. However, if most Quechua morphology is intact, while the Puquina lexicon is reduced and several other languages have contributed as well, this either suggests that original Quechua speakers invented Callahuaya, or that quechuization was well advanced when the language emerged. There has been some morphological restructuring. Nature of the mixture and structure The language is a form of Quechua with a vocabulary drawn from different sources, mostly from the by now extinct language Puquina (?Maipuran), but also from Tacana (PanoTacanan). The basic features of the language are generally agreed upon. A list of sources and

analytical studies is given in the references; a recent summary is Muysken (to appear). Abbreviations in the interlinear translations of all examples: AF AG BN CA FN PA RF 10 1-2 2 3

affmnative agentive benefactive (for), purposive (in order to) causative finite nominalizer past tense reflexive topic marker first person subject acting upon second person object second person subject or possessive third person subject

Consider a sentence such as (1): (1) Cchana-chi-rqa-iqui isna-pu-na-iqui-paq call-CA-PA-I-2 gO-BN-FN-2-BN

'I had you called so that you can go.' Here cchana- 'call' and isna- 'go' are nonQuechua, but all the other morphemes are Quechua and the structure corresponds to a Quechua one. A similar example is (2): (2) mii-qa llalli oja-cu-j-mi acha-n man-TO good eat-RF-AG-AF be-3 'The man is a very greedy eater.' (Oblitas Poblete 1968:40)

Here mii 'man', oja- 'eat', and acha- 'be' are nonQuechua. Again, the rest of the morphemes and the syntactic structure are Quechua.

1340

Pieler Muysken

In essence, Callahuaya presents a merger of Quechua and Puquina, adopting the series of aspirated and glottalized stops (lacking in Puquina) from Quechua, and the five vowel sys.tem with distinctive lengthening from Puquina (Quechua has a three-vowel system and the Southern varieties lack a length distinction). While long vowels only appear in words of Puquina origin, aspirated and glottalized stops appear in words taken from Quechua and Puquina. When we consider the distribution of consonants and of consonant clusters, the Callahuaya system resembles that of Quechua much more than that of Puquina. The Callahuaya case system is largely identical with the Quechua system: about ten affixes attached to the head nouns right within the noun phrase. The Quechua locative -pi alternates with -pichu. As to word order, the data all conform to Quechua OV word order, as may be expected from the discussion so far. Question words are initial, objects and complements tend to precede the verb, predicates precede the copula, all modifiers precede the head noun. There appears to be a system of nominal postpositions similar to the one in Quechua, but with different lexical shapes. The largest difference between Callahuaya and Quechua morphology involves the second and third person, which are marked in Quechua with -nkil-yki and -n, respectively: (3) wasi-yki 'your house'

wasi-n puri-nki puri-n

'her/his house' 'you walk' '(s)he walks'

The Quechua second person verb form -nki is used five times in the present for a second person in Callahuaya sentences, twice unambiguously for a third person, and six times it is ambiguous, because the Spanish translation has a third person, which in Spanish could also be the polite second person form, and the sentences have no context. Some examples:

(4) yani kkena yuna-nki much money eam-2 Ganabas mucho dinero. 'Y ou made a lot of money.'

(5) ikili-n

acha-pu-nki father-2 be-BN-3 Quien es tu padre? 'Who is your father?'

kitaj who

We can conclude from this a variable overgeneralization of the verbal second person marker -nki to third person contexts in Girault's data, while the verbal third person marker -n is not used in second person contexts. For nominal person marking, the picture is yet more complicated. The overall picture is one of great irregularity. First, the second and third persons have been exchanged in the singular. In parallel with this, the Quechua second person plural marker -chis is used as an emphatic form in the third singular, and the Quechua third person plural marker is used as a second person emphatic form. Finally, the morphophonemic alternations in the Callahuaya person forms are patterned on the Quechua use of euphonic ni after consonants, but have incorporated sensitivity to the Puquina feature of vowel length. With nominal possession we have genitive -j or benefactive -paj on the prenominal possessor, and -n (-an after consonants) on the possessed element. The -n form is the expected Quechua third person form (since a nominal possessor is by definition third person), while the altern ant -an is not derived from Quechua. Thus nominal and pronominal possession follow different rules. Wider social context Little is known about the context in which Callahuaya is spoken, but some things may be surmised with reasonable certainty. It is not intelligible for speakers of possible source languages (as far as it is known), but sounds like some form of Quechua. It is an in-group ritual language, and certainly not comparable to

Callahuaya in Bolivia

anything like code-switching between the putative source language. The Callahuaya are held in awe, and part of this is due to their knowledge of a secret languages, termed by some "the language of the Incas". The latter denomination is probably incorrect.

Language acquisition aspects Unfortunately we know nothing of how the language emerged; it may well be that the itinerant

1341

healers mixed the half-forgotten Puquina that they used to speak with the Quechua that they had become fluent in. Thus language death may well have played a role (one of the contributor languages is effectively dead), but probably not mixed marriages. There is a clear separate identity for the Callahuaya, and their secret healing language may well contribute to it. It is not probable that it ever was a contact language.

References Alb6, Xavier 1987 Commentary on Torero 1987. 1989 "Introduction", in: Girault 1989. Girault, Louis 1974 "La cultura Kallawaya", in: Dualismo 0 pluralismo cultural en Bolivia (Mesa redonda sobre expresiones de la cultura boliviana en el lapso 1925-1974). La Paz: Casa Municipal de la Cultura. 1989 "Kallawaya", El idioma secreta de los incas. La Paz, Bolivia: UNICEFIWHO (World Health Organization). Mondaca, Jaime n.d. La lengua callawaya. Apuntes de un cuaderno de campo. University of St Andrews, Scotland: Centre for Latin American Linguistic Studies, Working Paper No.18. Muysken, Pieter to appear "Callahuaya", in: S.G. Thomason (ed.), Non-Indo-European-based pidgins and creoles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Oblitas Poblete, Enrique 1968 El idioma secreto de los incas. Cochabamba, Bolivia: Los Amigos del Libro.

Relevant map Contact languages: Ecuador and Bolivia (Callahuaya). Compiled by Pieter Muysken. Map 142.

Rosing, Ina 1990 Introducci6n al mundo callawaya. Curaci6n ritual para vencer penas y tristezas. [Introduction to the Callahuaya world. Ritual healing to overcome pains and depressions]. Cochabamba, Bolivia: Los Amigos del Libro. Saignes, Thierry 1989 "Presentation", in Gurault 1989. Stark, Louisa R. 1972 "Machaj-Juyai: Secret language of the Callahuayas", Papers in Andean Linguistics 112: 199-228. 1985 "The Quechua language in Bolivia", in: Hariet E. Manelis Klein-Louisa R. Stark (eds.), South American Indian languages. Retrospect and prospect, 516-545. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. Torero, Alfredo 1987 "Lenguas y pueblos altiplanicos en tomo al siglo XVI" [Languages and peoples of the high plains at the turn of the 16th century], Revista Andina 5/2: 329-406.

The Tupi-Guarani languages of Atlantic South America, and Linguas Gerais Will em F. H. Adelaar The relevant map is listed at the end of this text. The Tupi-Guaranf languages At the arrival of the first Portuguese explorers in 1500, the coast of what is now Brazil was predominantly inhabited by speakers of TupiGuarani languages. The southernmost sector of it, extending inland as far to the west as the Paraguay river, was occupied by the Guarani (Carij6 in Portuguese sources). Their language, Old Guarani, was the predecessor of modern Paraguayan Guarani. Tupi (de Sao Vicente) was spoken in the modem state of Sao Paulo. The remaining part of the Brazilian coast, all the way up from Rio de Janeiro to the mouth of the Amazon river was inhabited by speakers of the Tupinamba (or Classical Tupf) language. The three languages were closely related, Tupinamba being the most conservative. Other languages of the Tupi-Guarani family, itself a member of the more comprehensive Tupi stock, are found distributed in different parts of the interior of lowland South America. The close affinity of the coastal Tupi-Guarani languages points to a relatively recent expansion, which took place in the late Middle Ages, probably at the expense of other local populations. Its motive, apart from overpopulation, can be found in the religious beliefs of the Tupi-Guarani people and, more particularly, in their permanent quest for a promised "land without evil" (yvy mar'e) to be found in the east. Modem Guarani groups, such as the Mbya, which have their homeland in the northeastern Argentinian department of Misiones and adjacent areas, still follow this practice. Some of them have reached northern Brazil on their migrations. During the initial decades of Portuguese colonial presence in Brazil, the Tupi or Tupinamba language was known as "Lingua

Brasflica". In a grammar of the language, Joseph de Anchieta refers to it as "the language most employed on the coast of Brazil" (Arte de grammatica da Lfngua mais usada na costa do Brasil, Coimbra 1595). The Tupinamba Indians themselves were largely wiped out by the Portuguese during the 16th century. Some groups, however, survived and the language continued to be used in the Brazilian colony for some time. It also developed into a so-called Lingua Geral ("general language") spoken by non-Indians. The Guarani language was widely used in the 16th century in Eastern Paraguay, Southern Brazil and along the tributaries of the La Plata River. It became the language of the Jesuit missions that were established in the area during the 17th century. The Spanish Jesuit Antonio Ruiz de Montoya left several monumental studies of the Guarani language as it was spoken in the early 17th century (Tesoro de La Lengua Guaranf, Madrid 1639; Arte y BocabuLario de La lengua Guaranf, Madrid 1640). After the expulsion of the Jesuits from the Spanish empire in 1767, Guarani survived as the everyday language of the Paraguayans. A majority of the Guarani-speaking population today has a mestizo, rather than an Indian identity. Several Indian groups, such as the Mbya, also preserve dialectal varieties of the Guarani language. These linguistically conservative groups are mainly distributed over Argentina, Southern Brazil and Paraguay. The grammar of modem Paraguayan Guarani is somewhat simplified in relation to Old Guarani, its 16th century ancestor. The development of modem Paraguayan Guarani is similar to that of the Brazilian "general languages" (Linguas

1344

Willem F. H. Adelaar

Gerais) in relation to Tupi de Sao Vicente and Tupinamba. Llnguas Gerais Under the Portuguese colonial administration in Brazil, settlers of European descent often married Tupi-speaking women. Their offspring took their identity from their Portuguese fathers, but spoke the language of their mothers. The varieties of Tupi that were in use among this mixed population were called Lingua Geral ("general language", plural Linguas Gerais). Two varieties developed, one of them in the area of Sao Paulo, the Lingua Geral Paulista, and the other in the present-day states of Para and Maranho, the Lingua Geral Amazonica. The morphology of these general languages is a simplified version of that of the classical Tupi languages (Tupi de Sao Vicente and Tupinamba, respectively). Case endings were replaced by postpositions, the complex morphophonemics of the classical

Reference Rodrigues, A.D. 1986 Llnguas Brasileiras. (Languages of Brasil). Sao Paulo. University of Brasilia.

Relevant map Aymaran and coastal Tupi-Guarani: historical. Compiled by Willem F.H. Adelaar. Map 138.

language was regularised and some distinctions in the personal reference system were lost. These processes are reminiscent of the development of modern Paraguayan Guarani from Old Guarani. The Lingua Geral Paulista was generally used in the south of Brazil during the 18th century, inter alia, among those who took part in the slaving expeditions of the bandeirantes. It is poorly known and disappeared sooner than the Lingua Geral Amazonica, which was widely used until the end of the 19th century. The Lingua Geral Amazonica has survived until the present day in the Rio Negro basin in northwestern Brasil, where it is locally known as Nheengatu ("good language") or Geral. It has also spread into neighbouring areas of Colombia and Venezuela, where it is called feral (reflecting the Spanish spelling and pronunciation of Portuguese Geral).

Areas of multilingualism im Northern South America Willem F. H. Adelaar The relevant map is listed at the end of this text Multilingualism in the Upper Xingu Region, and in the Vaupes area The headwaters of the Xingu river in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso constitute an area of extraordinary ethnic and linguistic diversity. The languages in this area belong to the Arawak (Waura, Mehinaku, YawalapitO and Carib families (Kalapalo, Kuikuro, Nahukwa, Txiko) and to the Tupf stock (including the Tupf-Guaranf Kamayura and the non-Tupf-Guaranf AwetO. Trumai is a linguistic isolate. Speakers of Ge languages (Suya and, in the 1970s, Kayap6) have also settled in the area, but did not become fully integrated culturally. The tribes of the Upper Xingu entertain close economic and cultural relations. Markets, some religious celebrations and sports events are organised intertribally. Yet, no lingua franca seems to have developed. Members of each tribe speak their own language and have a passive knowledge of some of the other languages. The Kamayura language is widely known because Kamayura women have married into almost every other tribe. (A.D. Rodrigues, oral communication.)

Multilingualism in the Vaupes area The Amazonian territory of Vaupes in southeastern Colombia is named after the Vaupes river. The Vaupes has its source in Colombia and flows into the Rfo Negro, a northern tributary of the Amazon. Both on the Colombian, and on the Brazilian side the Vaupes (Uaupes) basin is inhabited by speakers of (Eastern) Tucanoan languages. The Tucanoan tribes have exogamic marriage habits. As a result, each individual speaks both his mother's and his father's language, and usually several others as well. Non-Tucanoan groups, such as the Arawakan Tariana, are also part of this system of intertribal relations. In addition to wide-spread multilingualism, one Tucanoan language, Tucano, is used as a lingua franca. In this role, it competes with Geral (see Lfnguas Gerais) on the Upper Rfo Negro. Some tribes use another Tucanoan language, Cubeo, as a language of intercultural communication.

References Jackson, J. 1974 "Language identity of the Columbian Vaupes Indians", in: R. Bauman-J. Sherzer (eds.), ExpLorations in the ethnography of speaking, 179-197. Cambridge & New York.

Relevant map Aymaran and coastaL Tupi-Guarani: historicaL. Compiled by Willem F.H. Adelaar. Map 138.

Sorensen, A.P. 1985 "An emerging Tukanoan linguistic regionality: policy pressures", in: H.E.M. Klein-L.R. Stark (eds.), South American Indian Languages: retrospect and prospect, 140-156. Austin.

Berbice Dutch Creole 1 Silvia Kouwenberg Relevant maps are listed at the end of this text. Situated on a small section of the Berbice River area (Guyana, South America), Berbice Dutch Creole with its four or five remaining speakers is the only uncontroversial Dutch-related creole still spoken today (Bruyn-Veenstra in press; Robertson 1989). Notwithstanding evidence for the existence of creole stages in its history, Afrikaans is accorded the status of WestGermanic language (Den Besten 1988). Negerhollands, which at one time was the vernacular of the Danish Antilles, now the US Virgin Islands, is extinct (Graves 1977; Hall 1992). The same holds for Skepi Dutch or Essequibo Dutch, once the vernacular of the Essequibo in Guyana (Robertson 1976). 1. Background At the time of this writing, November 1992, the speakers of Berbice Dutch Creole (BD) number four or five, semi-speakers perhaps ten. They grew up and for the most part still live in a particular section of the Berbice River area of Guyana. They are the last surviving speakers of a language which at one time was the vernacular of the Dutch-owned Berbice colony. This colony consisted of plantations and small settlements along the Berbice River, Canje River, and Wiruni Creek (see the relevant map). Its demise started towards the end of the eighteenth century with the move of plantations to the coastal area (see below) and the change to British ownership of the colony in 1814, and was accelerated when missionaries founded schools in BD speaking communities from the middle of the 19th century, making English the language of church and school. One such missionary was Charles D. Dance. In 1914, Hugo Schuchardt discussed and discarded the possibility that a creole lexically related to Dutch existed in the Berbice River area (Schuchardt 1914: xiii). His discussion was

prompted by Dance's Chapters from a Guianese logbook (1881), in which the author frequently remarks on the use of "Creole Dutch", and reports the following conversation: I remember seeing him [i.e. Willie, the son of the proprietor of plantation Peereboom on the Berbice River - SK] at a wedding party encouraging the Arawak Indian maidens and matrons to drop their bashfulness for a time, and busily engaged in initiating them into the mysteries of knives and forks ... Roars of laughter ensued when, on one Arawak patriarch, a little elated, calling out in Creole Dutch, "Echeh habu sarapa ca" - I have no three pronged arrow (meaning a fork to take up his meat with), Willie archly advised him "Dake de wioacache ne?" - to use his one pronged arrow instead. (Dance 1881: 51) Schuchardt comments that he is unable to interpret these words "either with the help of English or of Dutch" (translation Gilbert 1985: 47). Below, the utterances are rendered in modern BD with the source language of each item (J = sh, E = an open e-sound not as open as 'a' in 'cat', more like 'e' in 'let'). With the exception of habu 'have', EkE '1', and di 'the', all words have non-Dutch etymologies. The significance of this fact will be the subject of section 3 below.

1348

(1)

Silvia Kouwenberg

wajakaf nil Eke habu sarapa ka( nE) / deki di I have 3-arrow NEG / take the I-arrow no? lli lli Ar EI / EI lli Ar lli 'I don't have a three pronged arrow.' / 'Take the one pronged arrow, no?' (Du = Dutch, EI =Eastern-JjQ, Ar = Arawak)

The only other published source of nineteenth century BD is Swaving (1827). His wife was a native speaker of BD and he apparently learned the language from her. In his account of his years as the owner of a plantation on the Berbice River, he remarks on its use, quotes some words, and quotes two sentences when he describes a conversation between himself and his African mother-in-law. The pertinent passage follows. I tried once to convert my black motherin-law to Christian faith, and naturally started out with the birth of our Saviour, because she appeared to interpret her Abadi as the same Supreme Being to which we have given the name of God, despite the contradictory properties which followed from her heathen fallacies. The conversation was held in Creole. But (2)

hardly had I commenced my proselyting speech, hardly had the word Abadi habe enne tobbeke come out of my mouth, or she interrupted me: "nenne, nenne, de grotte Abadi kante habe tobbekes ka, " and when I intended to proceed to tell her about the Virgin Mary and what happened in Bethlehem, she angrily walked out of the house, muttering that I was fooling her. (Swaving 1827: 267-268; his italics; my translation)2 Swaving's brief exchange follows in a modern BD rendering, with the etymological source language of each item. Had Schuchardt known of this publication, his position would undoubtedly have remained the same: this fragment, like that in Dance (1881), cannot be interpreted with the help of Dutch alone.

Abadi habu en toko have one child God EI lli lli EI 'God has a child.' nEnE, di groto Abadi kanti habu toko ka no the great God cannot have child NEG EI lli lli lli EI lli lli EI 'No! no! the great God cannot have children.'

Not until the mid seventies, when Ian Robertson discovered that this language was still spoken, was BD studied. This discovery is related in Robertson (1976). Aspects of BD grammar are described in Robertson (1979, 1983, 1990). Aspects of attrition are discussed in Robertson (1982). Basic vocabulary of BD is compared to that of Skepi Dutch and Negerhollands in Robertson (1989). The significance of the substratal element is reviewed in Robertson (in press). Robertson (forthcoming) contains a

previously unpublished early 19th century list of 44 BD words. Other scholarly work on BD includes the following: in Bruyn-Veenstra (in press) aspects of BD grammar are compared to Afrikaans, Negerhollands, and 17th century Dutch, while Stolz (1987a, b) contains discussions of BD grammar compared to Negerhollands and to attrited forms of Dutch. Aspects of BD grammar are discussed in Kouwenberg (1991, 1993 a, b, in press b) and in Kouwenberg-Robertson

Berbice Dutch Creole

(1988). The significance of the substratal element in BD and its relation to theories of creole formation is addressed in Kouwenberg (in press b), Muysken-Smith (1986), Smith (1987), Smith, Robertson-Williamson (1987). 2. History and use of Berhice Dutch Creole Creole languages typically develop when the native languages in a language-contact situation cannot serve the purpose of inter-group communication. Moreover, creole languages in the Caribbean typically developed in the context of slavery and plantation societies. BD arose in an enforced contact situation on Dutch-owned plantations. From the time of its formation it would have served a communicative purpose between three groups: Africans, Indians (i.e. American Indians), and Europeans. Historical and linguistic evidence identify the latter two as primarily Arawak and Dutch; although historical evidence points to diverse linguistic backgrounds in later periods, linguistic evidence identifies the first as chiefly Eastern-IjQ in the early years of colonization. We will discuss the historical evidence below, while the linguistic evidence will be reviewed in section 3. The establishment of plantations on the Berbice River was initiated by Abraham van Peere, who, in 1627, was granted permission by the Zeeland chamber of the West India Company to establish a colony. Although the number of plantations seems to have been quite small-five in 1666, eight in 1714-Robertson (in press) points to evidence that the numbers of slaves on the plantations were relatively large, possibly 90 on average by the early eighteenth century (as opposed to around 50 Europeans in the entire colony). 3 While in the early period of colonization, attempts were made to enslave Arawak Indians, these were apparently abandoned in favour of the pursuit of friendly relations with the Indian communities. It is evident from Swaving (1827) that Indians supplied colonists with food items, led hunting and fishing parties, acted as guides, captured and killed runaway slaves, acted as

1349

housekeepers on the plantations, and that many male colonists lived with Indian women. The change from Dutch to British ownership virtually coincided with a move of plantations to the coastal area and the abandonment of the original plantations on the Berbice, Canje and Wiruni. As a result, BD changed from the vernacular of the colony to a language on the periphery, a situation which contributed to its survival into the present century. It is obvious from sources such as Swaving (1827) and Dance (1881), as well as from general knowledge of the history of Berbice colonization, that this entailed a change in the presence of groups which employed BD for communicative purposes. The downriver move of plantations would have left the following groups in the original plantation area: Arawak-speaking Indian communities, and BD speaking free black, Indians and mixed descendants of inter-ethnic relationships; individual or even widespread bilingualism between Ar and BD is likely to have existed. The majority of Europeans and slaves moved to the coastal area. My own experience in the Berbice River area suggests that the shift from BD to Guyanese took place first among Afro-Guyanese, followed by BD speaking Indians and 'Bovianders', i.e. people of mixed Indian, African and European descent. When I carried out my research, speakers of BD tended to identify Indian ancestry as the source of transmission of BD, while they specifically pointed out that black families had stopped using BD before their families did. Indian ancestry in this context does not necessarily point to a 'pure' Indian ethnicity, it may also refer to mixed ethnicity which shows a closer likeness to an Indian type than to an African type of person. One speaker pointed to his wavy hair and said that he had gotten both that and the language from his mother, while his father, who was black, knew no BD. It is ironic that a creole language which contains a large African element would in its last stages be identified with an Indian rather than with an African ethnicity.

1350

Silvia Kouwenberg

In most families in which BD was spoken during the nineteenth century, the shift to Guyanese was completed by the turn of this century. That shift was delayed in a few families, in particular (1) in a small group of families living on the Wiruni Creek, (2) in a small number of presumably closely interrelated families on the Berbice River. My informants grew up in the first decades of this century in families in which BD was the first language, while their wider environment was either bilingual in BD and Guyanese, or in Ar and Guyanese, or monolingual in the latter. The youngest of them was born in 1923. They were the last to learn BD in their childhood, some of them as a first language, some as a second language. In their adult lives, BD was rejected as an 'uncivilized' and therefore inappropriate means of communication' and all became Guyanese-dominant. As a result, modern BD contains many Guyanese elements, in vocabulary and grammar, even where original BD expressions are available. BD existed alongside other languages throughout its history, though of different degrees of importance: - Arawak, which is only now moving towards extinction in Arawak communities on the Berbice River. That Arawak is still spoken in the Indian community at the Wikki Creek-a tributary of the Berbice River which formed part of the plantation area-though no longer learned by children, suggests that BD was never the first language of Indians in their communities, though it may have been for Indians who lived on the plantations and their descendants. - African languages for at least as long as slave trade persisted, i.e. up to the end of the eighteenth century. - Dutch, in particular the Zeeland and Amsterdam dialects of Dutch, well into the nineteenth century, though of diminishing importance from the second half of the eighteenth century onwards.

- Other European languages: French, German and British planters, clerks, etc. were a minor presence during most of the history of the Berbice as a Dutch colony, with English becoming of increasing importance from the end of the eighteenth century onwards, eventually replacing Dutch as the colonial language with the change to British ownership. - Guyanese, the English-lexicon creole which developed in the coastal area with the change to British ownership and the increase in Britishowned plantations. Guyanese came to be of increasing importance in the Berbice River area from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards. This may have been due to trading relations, to immigration from the coastal area, but most importantly, to increasing awareness that English and English-related Guyanese were the languages by which one and one's children would gain access to the state known as 'civilization' . 3. Language-internal evidence

Historical sources give us no indication of the identity of the Africans which shaped BD, mainly due to a lack of documentation of the early period of the history of Berbice colonization. Robertson (in press) mentions the well-documented heterogeneity of the slave population by the second half of the eighteenth century, by which time half of the slave population was locally born, the other half having a variety of ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. However, it is in the earlier years of colonization in which BD must have developed-or rather the precursor of the BD which has survived up to this century. This is where the linguistic evidence becomes relevant: BD is the Caribbean creole which shows the clearest evidence for significant substratal influence in its formation. Indeed, one of the central concerns of creole studies with respect to BD is the Eastern-lj Q (EI) contribution to vocabulary and grammar which was first noted by Smith, Robertson-Williamson (1987); the evidence for the seminal nature of the EI

Berhice Dutch Creole

contribution to this language has only become stronger since. ljQ is spoken by approximately one million people in the Niger Delta and adjacent riverine areas of Nigeria (Jenewari 1988: 107) With Defaka, it forms the Ijoid branch of the NigerCongo language family (Williamson 1989: 21). There has been no evidence that Ijoid contributed significantly to the formation of any Carribean creole language other than BD. The linguistic evidence is to be found first and foremost in the lexicon. In general, we fmd that basic vocabulary items are largely of Du or EI etymology. For instance, an analysis of the Swadesh 100 word list of basic vocabulary shows a proportion of words of AR:EI:Du etymology of 1: 3 8: 57 .4 Moving out of basic vocabulary as defined by the Swadesh 100 word list, the following are two examples of the division of labour between BD words of different etymologies: some kitchen utensils used as containers for food or drink in (3), the different parts of the leg in (4). (3)

(4)

baba 'hollowed calabash' (used as water container) < EI karbu 'plate' < AI kongki 'bow1' < Du bautu 'upper leg, thigh' < Du bwa 'leg/foot' < EI danfiri 'shin(bone)' < AI kini 'knee' < Du

We do not find equal contributions from the three source languages in all domains of the BD lexicon. The Arawak contribution is largely restricted to flora and fauna. The Du contribution to the overall BD lexicon is much larger than that of either EI or Ar: to every word of EI etymology, there are three of Du etymology, while words of Ar etymology number slightly less than those of EI etymology. Looking at some of the different domains in the lexicon, the following division may be established: - Pronouns: first and second person pronouns < Du, third person pronouns < EL

1351

- Quantifiers (incl. numerals up to twelve): all Even> Yukagir 999 Yakut, everybody spoke 999 Yakut is now slowly getting the upper hand over Russian 999

Yukagir language may have served as a language of intercultural communication 999 Yukagirs and Evens spoke Even 999 Yukagirs spoke Yukagir 999

Russian Far East, use of languages in its southern part aboriginal peoples, linguistic behaviour of the .. .in the Primor'ye and Amur 1027 aboriginal population on the Ussuri was bilingual 1025 Altaic family 1028 Altaic language branches 1028 Altaic languages, ancestral languages of other present-day 1028 Altaic languages, extinct 1028 Amur and Primor'ye, distribution of languages in the 1025 boarding school system also contributed to the loss of indigenous language pupils among Nanais etc. 1027 Chinese influence is limited to individual borrowings 1026 Chinese language, Manchus switched over to it 1025 Chinese language, mastered the 1022 Chinese language, role of the .. .for the communication 1025 Chinese language spread amongst the local ethnic groups 1026 Chinese language, use of the 1025 Chinese lexical influence 1026 Chinese, passive knowledge of...is rather widespread 1028 Chinese, speak ... quite frequently until now 1028 Chinese-speaking Nanais 1026 Chinese, spoke ... to a varying degree 1026 elementary education was carried out in Nanai with the Amur Nanais 1027 elementary school instruction in the Nanai language 1026 ethno-linguistic affiliation of developed cultures of the early metal age 1015 ethno-linguistic identification of the medieval cultures of the southern Primor'ye 1015

Gastarbeiter Deutsch 1027 Indo-European language family 1028 intercommunication, first attempts at 1026 intercommunication, methods of...between the various aboriginal groups 1025, 1026 intercommunication situations between Udihes and Oroch etc.: each side spoke its own language 1026 lurchen language used for interethnic communication 1025 lurchen-Manchu, differences of this protolanguage from the 1025 lurchen-Manchu, immediate mutual comprehension between the southeastern Tungus protolanguage and 1025 Korean as their native language 1024 Korean language, isolated individuals know the 1024 Korean language, knowledge of the ... decreased 1024 Korean-lapanese branch 1028 Kyakhta variant of the Pidgin 1027 Kyakhta language 1027 language situation, fundamental change of the .. .in the Primor'ye 1026 Manchu language as means of communication 13 Manchu, mother tongue was 1028 Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu and Paleoasiatic languages 1030 Nanai (Amur dialect) 1026 Nanai and Udihe writing changed to the Russian alphabet 1026 Nanai, establishment of written forms for 1026 Nanai proper 1028 Nanai textbooks for learning reading and writing 1029 Nanai writing on the basis of the Russian alphabet 1029

Subject finder list

Nanais, linguistically related to the Bikin 1023 Nanais switched to the Chinese language 1022 Nanais, writing for the 1029 Nivkh language belongs to one family with the Chuckchi-Kamchadallanguages 1028 Oroklanguage1025 percentage of persons who regard the traditional language of their peoples as their mother tongue 1028 Pidgin elements based on Russian 1029 Pidgin has even begun to fulfil poetic functions 1029 Pidgin served the needs of everyday communic ation 1027 Pidgin was used by Russians to communicate with Chinese 1027 Pidgin was used by the Chinese and Russian traders 1027 Primor'ye and Amur: use of the mother tongue at school was not encouraged 1027 Primor'ye: the use of languages by the different ethnic communities 1025 Proto-Altaic, disintegration of 1028 Proto-Japanese 1028 Proto-Korean 1028 proto-language from which the Udihe, Oroch and Nanai languages arose 1025 Proto-Mongolian 1028 Proto-Tungus-Manchu 1028 Proto-Turkic 1028 Russian acculturation process 1027 Russian as language of interethnic communication amongst the people of the Amur area 1026 Russian-based and Chinese-based Pidgin elements 1030 Russian-Chinese elementary folklore 1029 Russian-Chinese expanded pidgin in the Primor'ye 1026, 1027 Russian-Chinese Pidgin 1027 Russian-Chinese Pidgin as a post-pidgin continuum 1027 Russian-Chinese Pidgin as a trade jargon 1026 Russian-Chinese Pidgin dialect close to the Kyakhta dialect widespread in the Primor'ye and Manchuria 1026, 1027 Russian-Chinese Pidgin in the Primor'ye and Manchuria did not become creolized 1027

1597

Russian-Chinese Pidgin used as the language of the family 1027 Russian-Chinese Pidgin was well known to the entire population 1027 Russian ethnolect of the Chinese-Russian Pidgin 1027 Russian Far East, intra-community and interethnic communication by different ethnic communities in the 1025 Russian functioning as the sole language of interethnic communication 1027 Russian, gradually became 1028 Russian language almost exclusively used in a multi-ethnic conglomerate 1023 Russian language, beginning of the use of the 1026 Russian language, did not know the ... very well 1027 Russian language did not oust languages 1026 Russian language influence 1026 Russian language moved into an increasingly stronger position as language of interethnic communication 1026 Russian language, school teaching for the Udihes was carried out in the 1026 Russian language, universal spread of the 1027 Russian language was the only language of instruction 1027 Russian, lexical influence on local colloquial 1027 Russian only served in newly arising intercommunication situations 1026 Russian, parents preferred to speak with their children in 1027 Russian speech of Vietnamese represents a postjargon continuum 1027 Russian, standard 1027, 1030 Russian was the native language of many Primor'ye Koreans 1024 Russian which was used as a linguistic means, was far removed from the standard 1026 Russians use words borrowed from the Pidgin 1027 sinicization of the aboriginal population in the Ussuri River area 1016 sinicization process affecting Udihes 1022 socio-linguistic processes connected with Manchuria and the Amur 1013

1598

Subject finder list

socio-linguistic processes within the boundaries of the Far East of the USSR 1015 Taz, maintenance of the national language with the 1028 total switch to the Russian language 1027 Tungus-Manchu people changed over to the Chinese language 1017 Tungus-Manchu toponymic variants 1029 Udihe language 1026 Udihe language, Iman-Bikin dialect of the 1026

Udihe writing 1026 Udihes and the Oroch, intercommunication situations between the 1026 Ukrainian as their mother tongue 1029 Ukrainian mother tongue 1029 Ulchi language 1025 Ulchis and the Oroks, languages of the 1028 Vietnamese know Russian better than the others 1027

Sakhalin Island, linguistic situation aboriginal inhabitants of Sakhalin, linguistic contacts between the 1008 aboriginal inhabitants of Sakhalin with the immigrants, linguistic contact of the 1009 Ainu and Nivkh languages 1008 Ainu: inhabitants spoke Ainu fluently 1008 Ainu-Japanese bilinguals 1010, 1011 Ainu-Kamchadal contacts stopped 1010 Ainu language, preference for the 1009 Ainu language: the language commonly spoken on the island by all the aboriginal tribes amongst themselves 1008 Ainu language was most actively employed 1008 Ainu, officials were fluent in 1009 Ainu: only language actively employed by all the peoples on Sakhalin 1009 Ainu-Russian bilingualism abruptly died out 1011 Ainus know the language of the Bol'shaya River [in the south-west of Kamchatka] 1009 communication in Russian, or in Japanese 1009 contacts between representatives of various language groups 1008 Gilyak language and folklore 1011 Gilyaks: aboriginal neighbours of the Gilyaks easily acquired a knowledge of all the other local languages 1008 Gilyaks had to express themselves in Ainu, Orok etc. 1008 Japanese and Korean languages, knowledge of the 1009 Japanese, knowledge of 1010 Japanese monolingual majority 1011 Kamchadallanguage 1010

Kamchadal, knowledge of 1010 Kuril Islands became mono lingually Japanese 1011 Kuril Islands, communication situation history on the 1010 Kuril islands, ethno-communicative situation on the 1009 Nivkh can be regarded as one of the contact languages 1009 Okhotsk culture: linguistic affiliation has not yet been established 1009 Orok and Evenki languages 1008 Paleoasiatic group of languages 1008 Russian and Japanese appearance on Sakhalin caused at first no serious changes in the language picture 1009 Russian and Japanese, use of 1010 Russian as contact language 1009 Russian is the mother tongue 1009 Russian language 1009 Russian, monolingual speakers of 1011 Russification of the aboriginal population, active process of massive 1009 Russification was changing the linguistic situation 1009 Sakhalin aboriginals, present-day linguistic situation in the living areas of the 1012 Sakhalin: characteristic feature was active multilingualism 1008 Sakhalin, entire language situation on ... at the tum of the century 1008 Sakhalin, ethnolinguistic situation on the Island of 1011

Subject finder list

Sakhalin: few aboriginals regard as their mother tongue, the language of their ethnic group 1009 Sakhalin Island, linguistic situation on 1007 Sakhalin, the present-day linguistic situation in 1009

1599

speakers of different languages living together in the same place 1008 Tungus-Manchu group of languages 1008

Selkup as lingua franca borrowings in Selkup from all neighbouring languages 1035 northern Samoyedic languages 1035 Ostyak-Samoyedic 1035 Samoyedic 1035 Selkup as lingua franca 1035

Selkup borrowings 1035 Selkup language 1035 Selkup used for interethnic communication by Ostyaks [Khantys], Evenkis, Kets, perhaps Forest Nenets and Chulym Tatars 1035 Uralic language family 1035

South America Araucanian in the Southern Andes Araucanian: dominant language in central Chile, the non-insular part of southern Chile, and on Chiloe Island at the arrival of the Spaniards 1333 Araucanian grammar, first, published in 1605 1333 Araucanian has a rich and voluminous oral literature 1333 Araucanian has six vowels, five nasals and a contrast between alveolar and dental n, t, t 1333 Araucanian is a suffixing agglutinating language with a regular and transparent morphology 1333 Araucanian is phonologically richer than the languages of the Middle Andes 1333 Araucanian is remarkably free of dialect diversity 1333

Araucanian speakers widespread today in central and southern Chile, and in parts of Argentina 1333 Araucanian loki 'stone axe' is a possible loanword in Polynesian languages 1334 Araucanian used by Spanish religious authorities to evangelize non-Araucanian people 1333 Araucanians colonized large areas of present-day Argentina and linguistically assimilated local tribes 1333 Huilliche: the most divergent Araucanian dialect (moribund) 1333 Mapuche is a name used for the Araucanians and their language 1333 Mapudungun is the modern name of Araucanian 1333

Aymaran, the Lake Titicaca area, and the central part of the Pacific coastal area of Peru Aymara was the predominant language in the eastern and southern Bolivian highlands in the 16th century 1331

Aymaran dialects were found throughout the southern highlands of Peru in the 16th century 1331

1600

Subject finder list

Aymaran internal differentiation probably began some time in the first millenium AD 1331 Aymaran language family comprises two main branches 1331 Aymaran languages expanded rapidly southwards, assimilating or crowding out local groups (Puquina, Uru-Chipayan) 1331 fishermen's language (Quingnam?) along the Peruvian coast at the arrival of the Spaniards 1331 Jaqaru and Cauqui languages 1331

language contacts, interregional, between fishing populations along the Pacific coast of Peru and further south 1332 lexical borrowing in the Lake Titicaca basin and the tropical lowlands to the north of it, antedating Aymaran invasion 1331 Pre-Aymaran interlingual contacts in the Lake Titicaca basin 1331 trade language, central part of the Pacific coastal area of Peru 1331

Berbice Dutch Creole attrition of Berbice Dutch Creole, in the direction of language death 1353 basic vocabulary of Berbice Dutch Creole is mainly Dutch and East-Ijo 1351 Berbice Creole Dutch is the Caribbean creole which shows the clearest evidence for significant sub stratal influence 1350 Berbice Creole Dutch was not studied until the mid-1970s 1348-1349 Berbice Creole Dutch: communication between Africans (Eastern-Ijo), Indians (Arawak) and Dutch 1349 Berbice Dutch Creole cannot be interpreted with the help of Dutch alone 1347, 1348 Berbice Dutch Creole has been a dead language on the community level for at least fifty years 1353 Berbice Dutch Creole in Guyana is the only uncontroversal Dutch-related Creole still spoken today 1347 Berbice Dutch Creole was the vernacular of the Dutch-owned Berbice colony 1347 Berbice Dutch Creole: its demise started towards the end of the 18th century 1347 Berbice River plantations started 1627 - few plantations, many slaves 1349 bilingualism between Arawak and Berbice Dutch Creole speakers existed 1349 change from Dutch to British ownership coincided with the move of plantations to the coast, with Berbice Creole Dutch becoming a peripheral language 1349

contemporary Berbice Dutch Creole can be expected to differ from its ancestor in the 18th century due to internal change, language contact, and language death 1352 creole languages in the Caribbean typically developed in the context of slavery and plantation societies 1349 different lects of Berbice Dutch Creole employed by native speakers of Arawak, African languages, Dutch and other European languages: examples 1353 distribution of Dutch, East-Ijo and Arawak origin in the Berbice Dutch Creole general lexicon 1351-1352 enslaving Arawak Indians was abandoned in favour of friendly relations with the Indian communities 1349 example of Berbice Creole Dutch containing words of African origin 1348 example of Creole Dutch, containing words of Arawak and African origin 1347-1348 extinct Dutch-based creoles 1347 historical change in Berbice Dutch Creole 13521353 historical evidence is lacking for the identity of the Africans first shaping Berbice Dutch Creole, but the linguistic evidence in vocabulary and grammar points to East-Ijo 1350-1351 languages alongside Berbice Creole Dutch: Arawak, African languages (to the end of the 18th century), Dutch, other European languages, Guyanese 1350

Subject finder list

last speakers of Berbice Dutch Creole tended to identify with Indian ancestry as a source of transmission of the language 1349 linguistic contact between East-Ijo and Dutch is reflected in some areas of grammar 1352 most Berbice Dutch Creole speaking families had shifted completely to Guyanese by the end of the 19th century 1350

1601

shift from Berbice Creole Dutch to Guyanese (English-lexicon Creole of Guyana) took place first among Afro-Guyanese 1349 standard negation in Berbice Dutch Creole reflects linguistic contact between East-Ijo and Dutch 1352

Callabuaya in Bolivia Callahuaya grammatical features, with samples 1341 Callahuaya is a mixed language with Quechua morphology and Puquina and other vocabulary 1339 Callahuaya is an in-group ritual language 1341 Callahuaya is not intelligible for speakers of possible source languages, but sounds like Quechua 1340-1341

Callahuaya is spoken by itinerant healers 1339 Callahuaya person marking in verbs and nouns is irregular in the use of Quechua markers 1340 Callahuaya phonological features 1339-1340 Callahuaya sentence samples 1339 Callahuaya was probably never a contact language 1341 language death (of Puquina) may have played a role in the emergence of Callahuaya 1341

Media Lengua in Ecuador changes of Spanish words in Media Lengua 13351336 Media Lengua examples 1335 Media Lengua has a predominantly Spanish phonology which affects the Spanish words in it 1336 Media Lengua is learned before Quechua 1337 Media Lengua is not a secret language 1337 Media Lengua is Quechua with most stems replaced by Spanish forms 1335

Media Lengua is the result of expressive needs, not of communicative needs, with ethnic selfidentification of crucial importance 1336 Media Lengua may have emerged as a result of migration to the capital 1336 Media Lengua-speaking communities are culturally differentiated from their neighbours and have set themselves apart from them 1336-1337 structural results of the fusion of Quechua and Spanish into Media Lengua 1336

Quechua in the Middle Andes Aymaran morphology appears to be more archaic than its Quechuan counterpart 1328 Aymaran-speaking peoples conquered and occupied much of the southern Peruvian and Bolivian highlands 1329 Aymaran verb forms: elimination of vowels can result in sequences of up to eight consonants 1328

Aymaran vocabulary was probably influenced by Quechuan 1329 General Language ofthe Inca 1325 local languages coexisted with Quechua in northem Peru and western Ecuador 1326 native languages, other, fell into neglect and disappeared, except Aymara 1325

1602

Subject finder list

Quechua-Aymara relation: status of glottalized and spirated consonants plays a central role in dis cussions about this relation 1328 Quechua: a Central Peruvian highland branch and a peripheral branch 1325 Quechua dialects in Colombia and Ecuador show simplified morphology from intensive contact with local languages 1327 Quechua dialects most widely spoken: Bolivian, Ecuadorian, Ayacucho and Cuzco 1326 Quechua dialects of Arequipa and Puno are spoken in areas which were Aymara-speaking until a few centuries ago 1328 Quechua: dominant language in the Middle Andes at the beginning of the 16th century 1325 Quechua: expansion during the Spanish colonial rule 1326 Quechua grammar and dictionary appeared in print in 1560 1325 Quechua has borrowing relations with other Ian guages, especially Aymara 1326 Quechua in Colombia 1326 Quechua is a language family, rather than a language 1325 Quechua is under pressure of giving way to Spanish 1326 Quechua: its transparent structure and regularity favoured its success as a lingua franca 1327 Quechua lexical items in Chilenian colloquial Spanish 1325 Quechua loans in the Mapuche language of southern Chile and in Kunza in northern Chile 1325 Quechua loanword kUl1Ulra 'sweet potato' in Eastern Polynesian languages 1326 Quechua moved into new areas 1325 Quechua not convincingly proved to be related to any other language 1326

Quechua: original morphological complexity is well preserved in almost all dialects 1327 Quechua, peripheral, penetrated areas previously occupied by Aymaran speakers 1329 Quechua phonology is simple 1326 Quechua replaced local languages in northwestern Argentina 1325 Quechua, standardized variety of, as language of evangelization 1325 Quechua typology: agglutinative, almost exclusively suffixes, complex morphology 1326 Quechua was at first trade language in the highlands of Ecuador 1325 Quechuan and Aymaran interlingual contact situ ation was near the Central Peruvian coast and hinterland river valleys 1328 Quechuan and Aymaran differ in word-, root-, and syllable-structure 1328 Quechuan and Aymaran groups must have lived in close contact 1328 Quechuan and Aymaran proto-language phoneme systems are almost identical 1327 Quechuan and Aymaran: 25% of the lexicon of the proto-languages is virtually identical 1327 Quechuan and Aymaran: differences between them not less significant then their similarities 1328 Quechuan-Aymaran relationship is the result of a virtually unique linguistic symbiosis 1327 Quechuan-Aymaran similarities can almost all be attributed to borrowing 1327 Quechuan expansion in the north met with nonAymaran languages with a very different structure 1329 Spanish the sole language for official use 1326

South America, northern, areas of multilingualism Vaupes basin, Cubeo (Tucanoan language) as language of intercultural communcation in 1345 Vaupes basin, Tucano as lingua franca in 1345 Vaupes basin, Tucanoan languages in 1345 Xingu area, Arawak and Carib families languages in 1345

Xingu area, Ge languages in 1345 Xingu area, Kamayunilanguage widely known in 1345 Xingu area, no lingua franca in 1345 Xingu area, Trumai linguistic isolate in 1345 Xingu area, Tupi stock languages in 1345

Subject finder list

1603

Xingu river area is area of extraordinary linguistic diversity 1345

Tupi-Guarani languages of Atlantic South America, and Linguas Gerais Guaranf language was widely used in the 16th century in Paraguay, Brazil, etc. - also by Jesuit missions 1343 Guaranf survived as everyday language of the Paraguayans 1343 Guaranf, modem Paraguayan, is grammatically somewhat simpler than 16th century Old Guarani 1343 Tupi or Tupinamba language was known as "Lingua Brasflica" during initial Portuguese colonial presence 1343

Tupf varieties, two used among European-Tupf mixed population were called Lingua Geral (pI. Linguas Gerais) 1344 Tupf variety Lfngua Geral Amazonica survives in the Rio Negro basin, known as Nheengatu or Geral1344 Tupf-Guaranf languages (coastal) are closely related 1343 Tupi-Guarani languages occupied much of the coast of today's Brazil in 1500 1343

South East Asia Continental Bantawa Rai Bantawa dialect diversity 773 Bantawa is spoken as first language by about a third of the Rai 773 Bantawa Rai 773 Bantawa was lingua franca in the 19th and early 20th centuries 773 Chintang 773 Gorkha a Nepali kingdom 773 Kiranti 773 Kiranti kingdoms, literary language of 773

Kiranti orthography, traditional 773 Kiranti script 773 Lambichong or Mugali 773 Maithili, an Indic language 773 Rai 773 Rai languages are under threat from Nepali 773 Tibeto-Burman languages 773 Yakthung language has official status in Sikkim 773

Burmese as lingua franca Anglo-Burman 746 Anglo-Indian 746 Arakanese 745, 746, 747 Austroasiatic 747 Burman 746 Burmese 745, 746, 747 Burmese as a second language 746 Burmese is diglossic 746

Burmese-speaking 746 Burmese: the national language of Myanmar (Burma) 745 Chin 746, 747 Chin, Kachin, Kayah and Karen 747 Chinese 745 Dai 747 Dai languages as locallingue franc he 747

1604

Subject finder list

DrulU 745

English 745 Intha 745 Jinghpaw 747 Kachin 745, 746, 747 Karen 745, 746, 747 Kayah 745, 746, 747 literary High Burmese 746 Marma 746 Merguese 745 Mogh or Magh 746

Mon 745, 746, 747 Mon-Khmer 747 Rakhine (Arakanese) 745 Rakhine 745, 746, 747 Rakhine dialect of Burmese 746 Shan 745, 746, 747 spoken Low Burmese 746 Taungyo 745 Tavoyan 745 Tibeto-Burman languages 746 Yaw 745

Empires and Hngue franche in premodern South-East Asia Austronesian language 776 Burmans 776, 777 Burmese 775, 776, 777 Burmese adopted Mon script 776 Cham 775, 776 Cham as lingua franca in Champa 776 Cham dynasties 776 Cham kingdom 776 Charnic colony on southern Hainan Island 776 Charnic speakers in South Vietnam 776 Champa kingdom 775, 776 Chams 776 Chao Bon 777 Chenla Khmers 775 Chenla kingdom 775 Chinese 775, 776 Chinese sea-borne traders 775 Chru 776 French colonial ambitions 775 Funan kingdom 775 Haroi 776 Hui 776 Huihui 776 Huihui speakers are moslem Chams 776 Indic script 776 Jarai 776

Khmer 775, 776, 777 Khmer as a lingua franca 776 Khmer as a second language, bilingually 776 Khmer dynasty 775 Khmer Empire 775 Khmer, Mon and Cham as lingue franche 777 Khmer: national language of Kampuchea 776 Khmers 775 Mon 776, 777 Mon-Khmer languages 776, 777 Mon kingdom 775, 776, 777 Mon language 776 Nyahkur777 Pali 777 PalilBuddhist heritage 777 Pearlc groups: non-Khmer population 776 Rhade776 Roglai 776 Sanskrit 775, 777 SanskritlHindu heritage 777 SanskritlPali 776 standard Khmer 775 Thai 775, 776, 777 Thais 775 Viet 775, 776 Vietnamese 776

Kachin Atsi 749, 750, 751 Burmese 749, 750, 751

Burmish 749, 750 Chinese 751

Subject finder list

Dai 750 English 750, 751 Gauri 749 Jinghpaw 749, 750, 751 Jingpo 749, 750 Kachin 749, 750, 751 Kachin culture complex 749, 751 Kachin heartland 749 Kachin villages 750 Kachins 749, 750 Kauri 749 Lashi 749, 750, 751

LashiINgochang/Jinghpaw trilinguals 750 Lisu 749, 751 Maru 749, 750, 751 MaruiAtsilJinghpaw trilinguals 750 Naga 750 Ngochang 749, 750, 751 Pola 749, 750, 751 Rawang 751 Shan 750 Singpho 749, 750 Tibeto-Burman language 749

Lahu

Akha 753, 754 Akbas 753 Bana 753 bilingualism in Labu 753 Black Labu 753, 754 Black Labu is the general Lingua franca 753 Black (Labu Na) Labu 753 Black Labu orthographies 153 Burmese 754 Burmese-Lolo subgroup 753, 754 Chinese 753, 754 Chinese-Lisu 754 Co sung 754 Dai languages2 Dai lingue franche 754 English 754

Haw Chinese 753 Kucong 754 Lahu 753, 754 Lahu loanwords in other languages 753 Labus 753 Lao 754 Lisu 753, 754 Shan 754 Sila 753 Thai 754 Tibeto-Burman 753 Wa 753,754 Was 753 Yellow (Labu Shi) Lahu 753 Yellow Labu 753, 754 Yunnanese Chinese 753, 754

Nagamese Ahom 757,760 Angami 759, 760, 761 Ao 759, 760, 761 Assamese 757, 758, 759, 760, 761 Assamese as a lingua franca 759 Baric 757, 758, 759, 760 Bengali 758 Bishnupriya 758 Bishnupriya Manipuri 758 Bodo757,758,76~761

Central Chin 758

Chakhesang 758, 760, 761 Chang 759, 761 Chin 757, 758 Chokri758, 760, 761 Dai 757 Dimasa 757 English 761 Garo 757, 758 Haimi 759 Hindi 761 Htangan 759

1605

1606

Subject finde r list

Kabui 758 KabuiIPochuri 760 Kaccha Naga 758 Kachari 757 Kak Barak 757 Kheza 758, 760, 761 Khiemnungan 759 Kok Borok 757 Konyak 759, 760, 761 Kuki 757, 758, 761 Kuki-Chin-Naga 757, 758, 759 Lalung 757 Lhota 759, 760, 761 Liangmei 758, 760 Lushai 758 Lushai or Mizo 757 Manipur758 Manipuri 757, 758 Manipuri or Meithei 757 Mao 760 Maring 760 Meithei 758 Mizo 758 Naga 757,758,759,760, 761, 762 Naga Assamese 757 Naga languages 757 Naga Pidgin 757, 760, 761, 762 Nagamese 757, 758, 759, 760, 761, 762

Nagamese as lingua franca 761 Nagamese stabilized for inter-Naga contact 761 Nefamese 760 Nepali 761 Nocte 759 Northern (Baric) 759 Northern Naga 757,759 Phom 759, 761 Pochuri 758 Rangpan 759 Rengma 759,760, 761 Rongmei 758 S. Sangtam 760 Sangtam 760, 761 Serna 759, 760, 761 Southern (Kuki-Chin-Naga) 760 Southern Naga 757,759 southern Sangtam 758, 760 Tangkhu1759,760 Tangsa 759 Tibeto-Burman 757, 758, 761 Tripuri 757 Wancho 759 Yimchunger760,761 Zeliangrong 758, 759, 760 Zemi 758, 760 Zomi 758

Nepali as a lingua franca Avadhi 764, 765, 767 Bengali 768, 769, 770 Bengalis 768 Bhojpuri 764, 765, 767 Bhote 766, 767 Bhote, Sherpa 767 Bhotia 766, 770 Bhutia 766 Bihari 764 Danjongkha 769 Danuwar767 Dravidian 766 Dzongkha 769 eastern Hindi 764, 765 English 763, 764, 769

Ghale 766 Gorkha 768 Gorkhali 764, 768, 769 Gurkha 763, 765, 766 Gurkhas 764, 765 Gurung 765, 766, 767 Hindi 764, 765, 768, 769, 770 Hindi, literacy in 765 Indian English 764 Indic 763, 766, 767 Kaike 766 Khas Khura 764 Kiranti 766 Kira(n)ti 766 KirantilKiratiIRai 766

Subject finder list

Lepcha 768, 769, 770 Lhotshamkha 769 Limbu 765, 767, 768, 769, 770 literary Tibetan 766 liturgical language 766 Magar 765, 767 Maithili 764, 765, 766, 767 Manang766 Munda 766, 767 Nepala Bhasa 764 Nepali 763-772 Nepali/Gorkhali 769, 770, 771 Nepali, preponderance of 769 Nepali speakers 768, 771, 772 Nepali-speaking population 764, 765, 771 Nepalis 768 Newari 763, 764, 766, 767 non-Tibetan Tibeto-Burman groups 766 Nyishang 766 Pahari 763, 764, 765, 771 Rai765,766 Rai/Kira(n)ti 767

1607

Rajbansi 767 Santhal767 Satar 767 Sherpa 765, 769, 770 spoken Low 766 Sunuwar 765, 767 Tamang 766, 767 Thakali 766, 767 Tharu 767 Tibetan (Lhasa and other), spoken Low 766 Tibetan 764-766, 768-770 Tibetan influence 766 Tibetan monasteries 768 Tibetan-ruled kingdoms 768 Tibetan-speaking Indian and British settlers 768 Tibetan varieties in Nepal 765 Tibetans 765-766 Tibeto-Burman (languages) 763-767, 772 Tibeto-Burman Kiranti kingdoms 766 Tibeto-Burman mother tongue 766 Written Tibetan diglossic High 765

Southwestern Dai as a lingua franca Ahom779 Aiton 780 black Tai 781 Burmese 781 Burmese-Lolo 779 Buyi 779 Central Dai 779 Central Thai 780 Chinese 780, 781 Dai 779, 780, 781 Dehong Dai 779 Dong-Shui 779 Indic-derived orthography 781 Isan 780 Kadai languages 779 Kam-Sui languages 779 Kam-Thai first languages speakers 779 Kam/Dong 779 Kham Myang 780, 781 Kham Myang as local lingua franca in North Thailand 780

Khamti 780, 781 Khamti, Phake, Aiton 780 Khmer 780, 781 Khyn 780, 781 Lao 779, 780, 781 Lao Song 781 Lik Tai script 781 Lingao 779 MaklMo779 Malay 780 MaonamlMaonan 779 Miao-Yao 780 Mon 781 Mon-Khmer 780 MulamlMulao 779 Northeastern Thai 780 Northeastern Thai (Lao, Isan) as lingua franca 780 Northern Dai 779 Northern Thai 780

1608

Subject finder list

Northern Thai (Kham Myang) as lingua franca in North Thailand 780 Nung 779 Ong-Be 779 Pak Tai 780 Phake 780 Saek 779 Shan 779, 780, 781 Shan Tayok 780 Siam 780 Southern Thai (Pak Tai) used as lingua franca by Malay speakers in South Thailand 780 Southern Thai 780 Southwestern Dai 779, 780, 781 Southwestern Dai has at least 10 million secondlanguage speakers 779 Southwestern Dai probably the lingua franca during the Ahom rule in northeastern India 779 SuilShui779 Tai779 Tai Dam ('black Tai') 780

Tai Dam 780, 781 Tai Khaw 779, 780, 781 Tai Ly 779, 780, 781 Tai Mao 779, 780, 781 TaiMao, 779 Tai Mao, Shan, Tai Ly and Tai Khaw used as locallingue franche 779 Tai Neua 779 Tai Pong 779 Tai Yai 779, 780, 781 Tay 779 TenIYanghuang 779 Thai 779, 780, 781 Thai (Tai) scripts, various 781 Thais 781 Tibeto-Burman 779, 780 White Tai 779 Xishuangbanna Dai 779, 781 Yay 779 Yongren Dai 779 Zhuang 779

Vietnamese Cham empire 784 Charnic groups 784 Champa 784 Chinese 783 Chu Nom 783, 784 Han'gul783 Japanese 783 Jing 783 Kanji 783 Khmer empire 784 Khmers 784

Korean 783 Mon-Khmer languages 784 Sino-Korean 783 Sino-Vietnamese 783 Vietnamese 783, 784 Vietnamese as a lingua franca in Laos and Kampuchea 783 Vietnamese, romanization for 783 Vietnamese written with Chinese and SinoVietnamese characters 783

Chinese, Yunnanese Akha 786 Burmese 786 Cantonese 785 Chinese 843, 786 Chinese-Lisu 786 Chinese traders 785 Chinese villages 786

Dai 785 Hakka 785 Haw 785 Hokkien 785 Lahu 785, 786 Lisu 786 Lue 786

Subject finder list

Min 785 Panthay 785 Shan 786 Southern Min 785 Southwestern Mandarin 785 Teochiu (Chaozhou) 785

1609

Wa 785,786 Yunnanese 785 Yunnanese Chinese 785, 786 Yunnanese Chinese: main lingua franca of military units 786

South· East Asia insular, including Irian Jaya Indonesia and Malaysia: contact languages other than Malay Arabic as a religious language is very prestigious among Muslims 697 Arabic influence on Malay syntax is very marked in Muslim religious literature 697 Arabic influence on Malay, huge, is mainly lexical 697 Arabic loanwords in Malay, many of them, came through Gujarati, Bengali and Tamil 698 Arabic words were used in Protestant and Catholic religious vocabulary 697 autochthonous groups (highlands in East Kalimantan) 706 Bajau is known in parts of the Tomini-Tolitoli speaking area of Sulawesi, and is contact language in Sabah between Bajaus and Ilanuns 705 Bayan speakers use Bakumpai in their contacts with non-Bayan speakers in Borneo 706 Biak or Numfor, of islands in the Geelvink Bay of Irian Jaya, was a widespread contact language in the 19th and 20th centuries until World War II 707 Buginese and Macassarese left loanwords in languages of Flores and Bima 705 Buginese influenced the Bare'e language in Central Sulawesi, is contact language in an area on the west coast, and second language of the Massenrempulu speakers in South Sulawesi 704-705 Busang is a contact language along the Mahakam River in East Kalimantan 706 Cantonese is the Chinese contact language in Kuala Lumpur and several townships 698

Chinese immigration to Indonesia increased from 1860 onwards - details 698 Chinese in Malaysia and Singapore came to the Malay Peninsula from the 18th century onwards, speaking four main varieties of of Chnese 698 Chinese loanwords, mostly from Hokkien, are found in Malay IIndonesian and in other Indonesian languages 699 Chinese traders went to Indonesia from the 13th century onwards, intermarried with locals and developed the hybrid "Peranakan" communities who adopted the language of their environment 698 dichotomy between the assimilated Peranakan Chinese and the Totok (pure) Chinese who were culturally oriented towards China 699 Dutch came to Southeast Asia in the last years of the 16th century and ousted the Portuguese in many areas 700 Dutch ceased to play a significant role after the Indonesian Independence, except for certain areas (study of law, history etc, and social groups) 700-701 Dutch gained in importance in the 19th and especially the 20th century, with the westernization of Indonesian society 700 Dutch language influence remained relatively light: Malay and creolized Portuguese were already established lingue franche, and they adoped them as such 700 Dutch played a relatively modest role as a colonial language, but left a large number of loanwords

1610

Subject finder list

in Malay and Javanese, and had some influence on Indonesian syntax, idiom and morphology 701 English and Malay are used in contacts between Indians of different linguistic backgrounds in Malaysia and Singapore 696 English education in the Malay Peninsula was limited to the elite section of the society until after World War II 701 English role in the Malay Peninsula began in 1786 701 Fordata is a lingua franca throughout the Tanimbar Archipelago, replaced by a form of Malay as lingua franca with the younger generation 707 Gujarat was the main source of Muslim missionary activities in the Malay peninSUla and Sumatra - most Persian and Arabic influence came through it 695 Hakka is the Chinese contact language in Sabah, North Borneo 698 Hokkien is lingua franca among Chinese of different speech groups in Indonesia 698 Hokkien became a contact language among Chinese of different linguistic background in most parts of Malaysia and Singapore 698 Than: lingua franca in the Iban part of Sarawak and parts of West Kalimantan 705 Immigration of large number of South Chinese and South Indians in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to the Malay Peninsula 701 Indian cultural and linguistic impact was through trade and Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim conversion 695 Indian influence in Malaysia and Indonesia may date back to the second century A.D. 695 Indonesia: English became the most important foreign language and an important source of borrowing 703 Indonesia: English teachingg programme in Indonesian high schools has not been successful 702 Indonesia: lexical borrowing from English into Indonesian happens on a large scale, with planned and spontaneous borrowing 702 Indonesia: use of English is the foreground of the modem non-traditional society 702-703

Japanese was the language of higher administration in Indonesia during the Japanese occupation of Indonesia, leaving some Japanese loanwords 701 Javanese as court language and literary language in sultanates etc. outside Java, with strong Javanese influence 703 Javanese has had a wide influence on insular Southeast Asian languages, Kasons 703 Javanese lexical influence on Malay, examples 703 Javanese migrations in the 20th century within Indonesia and elsewhere 704 Javanese provided Indian loanwords to Malay through its literary influence 696 Javindo, a creolized hybrid language with predominantly Javanese grammar and a mixed Dutch-Javanese vocabulary 701 Kadazan: lingua franca used by all Kadazan (Dusun) speakers in Sabah 705-706 Kaili was lingua franca in the Tomini-Tolitoli language area, Central Sulawesi 705 Kendayan: contact language between Kendayans and other autochthonous people in parts of West Kalimantan 705 Macassarese influence on Northern Australian languages 705 Macassarese loanwords in Manggarai, and Macassarese influenced Blagar (Alor Island) 705 Madurese: the language of Madura Island off the northwest coast of Java, but also spoken on the northeast coast of Java, and by migrants to West Kalimantan 704 Malay, Javanese, Balinese and Karo Batak were directly affected by Indian influence, other languages (also in the Philippines) were indirectly affected through Malay 695-696 Malaysia: general policy was to change from English to Malay 701-702 Malaysia: since 1944, English used again for certain science subjects at universities, and still has prestige 702 Malaysia: Thai influence on local Hokkien Chinese and Malay in northern states 704

Subject finder list

Mandarin emerged as a new lingua franca among Totok (pure) Chinese of different speech groups 699 Mandarin is very popular as Chinese contact language among all Chinese in Malaysia and Singapore 698 Maya is a lingua franca in the Baja Ampat Islands, west of Irian Jaya 707 Ngaju used to be a general inter-ethnic lingua franca in Central Kalimantan, now lingua franca among autochthonous Borneo language speakers in the basins of six rivers 706 northern Bangka: almost creolized Hakka with heavy borrowings from Bangkanese Malay 698 Old Javanese: a form before the coming of Islam in Java, established in Bali in the 14th century, applied for creative use (for Indonesian lexical extension) today 704 Paku speakers (eastern border of Central Kalimantan) use Maanyan and Banjarese in external contacts 706 Peco', a creolized hybrid form of Dutch with Malay grammar and Dutch vocabulary with Malay and Sundanese elements 701 Persian loanwords in Indonesian languages: almost all borrowed via Indian languages 696697 Portuguese became a lingua franca along with Malay, and official language in territories remaining under Portuguese control 699 Portuguese loanwords in Indonesian languages (particularly Malay and Tetum), examples 699 Portuguese was introduced in Malaysia and Indonesia with the conquest of Malacca in 1511 699 Portuguese: simplified, pidginized and creolized forms of Portuguese - they did not disappear in areas where the Dutch took over 700 Ruteng dialect became lingua franca dialect among Manggarai dialect speakers (West Flores) 706 Sanskrit exerted phonological influence on Javanese, Madurese and old Malay 696 Sanskrit had most influence on Indonesian languages, but other more recent Indo-European,

1611

and also Davidian languages were also influential 695 Sanskrit is still a source for cultural and scientific neologisms in Indonesian, and a large number of affixes of Sanskrit origin are currently used, examples 696 Singapore: children used English in natural communication, with their English influenced by the background languages (Chinese, Malay, Indian English) 703 Singapore: English has gained in importance since its independence, is one of the four official languages and the first language of inter-ethnic communication 702 sources of Arabic (linguistic and other) influence 697 South Sulawesi influence on languages of Borneo 705 Southeast Asians were active participants in interaction with India after first contacts with Indians 695 Tamil influence in the Malay peninsula and in Karo Batak areas in Sumatra 696 Tamil loanwords in Indonesian languages, examples 696 Temiar used as a lingua franca among speakers of some of the Austro-Asiatic languages in peninsular Malaysia 704 Ternatan (near Halmahera) was generally understood as a lingua franca over a wide area in the 19th century 707 Tetum was a lingua franca before Portuguese colonization 706 Tetum-Prasa is a hybrid language with strong influence from Portuguese 706 Tetum: various dialects, with lingua franca (Tetum-Prasa or Tetun-Pra