Language Contact in a Postcolonial Setting: The Linguistic and Social Context of English and Pidgin in Cameroon 9781614511199, 9781614512486

Citation preview

Language Contact in a Postcolonial Setting

Language Contact and Bilingualism 4 Editor

Yaron Matras

De Gruyter Mouton

Language Contact in a Postcolonial Setting The Linguistic and Social Context of English and Pidgin in Cameroon

edited by

Eric A. Anchimbe

De Gruyter Mouton

ISBN 978-1-61451-248-6 e-ISBN 978-1-61451-119-9 ISSN 2190-698X Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. ” 2012 Walter de Gruyter, Inc., Boston/Berlin Cover image: Anette Linnea Rasmus/Fotolia Typesetting: RoyalStandard, Hong Kong Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen 앝 Printed on acid-free paper 앪 Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

for Margaret Anyangwa Aka Anchimbe my mother

Preface Investigations of language contact and language contact phenomena in postcolonial settings have revealed the complex nature of these spaces and the innovative ease with which the predominantly multilingual speakers cope with switching across languages and identities, in di¤erent contexts and for a multitude of reasons. It has been established that bilingualism or multilingualism both at societal and individual levels is the norm, and that the many languages spoken do not constitute sources of sociolinguistic dispute. Also, the nativisation of ex-colonial languages has been clearly documented in the literature. Studies of Pidgins and Creoles in these areas have also illustrated their origins and patterns of their lexical and grammatical evolution. As far as indigenous languages are concerned, the earlier focus on typology and classification has gradually been expanded to include sociolinguistic and pragmatic descriptions of social interactions in these communities. While these directions of research continue to project realities of these areas, new developments have come up which need to be captured in research. The major development focused on in this volume is the emergence of native speakers of English and Pidgin in Cameroon. The overall aim of the book, therefore, is to identify linguistic features and social processes as well as ecological influences in the evolution of two Englishes in Cameroon: the educated, institutionalised, indigenised variety commonly called ‘Cameroon English’ (CamE) and the expanded pidgin ‘Cameroon Pidgin English’ (CPE). The history of colonialism and its linguistic policies especially towards CPE have left marks on the current system of the language. This history, along with the local sociocultural ecology, is investigated in terms of its role in directing the evolutionary trajectory of these two languages. A significant development in the evolution of CamE and CPE in the last three decades is the emergence of L1 or native speakers of these languages. In the 1980s and 1990s some authors (e.g. Koenig et al. 1983, Mbangwana 1983, Alobwede 1998) surveyed children who were acquiring English or CPE as their first language. Today, over thirty years after, these two languages have established themselves deeper into the local ecology of the multilingual Cameroonian context and are further acquired as first languages. English is not only acquired as L1 by anglophone Cameroonian children but also by francophone children in urban multilingual areas. What challenges do these sociolinguistic changes constitute for linguistic

viii

Preface

research on CamE and CPE? Are the analytical frameworks used to describe them in the past still sustainable today? The chapters in this volume seek to propose answers to these questions as they advance new interpretations for phenomena in, and properties of, the current systems of these languages. Some recent frameworks are applied to contemporary CamE data with the aim of illustrating the further stabilisation of the norm through the emergent native speaker population. These frameworks include Simo Bobda’s (1994a) trilateral process, Anchimbe’s (2006a) filtration processes, and Wolf ’s (2008) cognitive sociolinguistic approach to World Englishes. While some properties of CamE and CPE are elaborately described here, this volume is ultimately a call for further in-depth investigations of the varieties as codes with generations of native speakers. A volume like this cannot be the fruit of individual e¤ort. First of all, I wish to thank all the contributors to this volume for their active participation and patience during the editing process. I own a debt of gratitude to an anonymous reviewer who made very succinct proposals on both the form and content of many chapters in this volume. My sincere appreciation goes to Loreto Todd for encouraging me all through this project and for reading through and making comments on some of the chapters. With her over five decades of research on Cameroon, she helped me get a longitudinal picture of the history of CamE and CPE over a 50-year period. In the initial stages of this project, I benefited from contact with Paul N. Mbangwana and John Spencer, to whom I say thank you. Several other people read and commented on some chapters in this book. I am highly indebted, in this regard, to Hans-Georg Wolf, Augustin Simo Bobda, Susanne Mu¨hleisen, Ulrike Gut, Lisa Lim, Chikas Danfulani, Hugo C. Cardoso, Bettina Migge, Thomas B. Klein, Chinedu Uchechukwu, Bonaventure M. Sala, Shelome Gooden, and Magnus Huber. I would like to thank Yaron Matras (series editor: Language Contact and Bilingualism) for showing immediate interest in this volume. Marcia Schwartz and Wolfgang Konwitschny at Mouton de Gruyter always provided solutions where and when needed and coordinated the publication process smoothly. Lastly, my wife Joyce and daughter Thalia-Favour have been a great source of inspiration. They endured my long stays in the o‰ce. Eric A. Anchimbe June 2012

Table of contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

Introduction Chapter 1 Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Research approaches to Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eric A. Anchimbe

1

Part I. Cameroon English: Properties and frameworks Chapter 2 The expression of modality in Cameroon English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Daniel A. Nkemleke Chapter 3 A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English and other world Englishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hans-Georg Wolf Chapter 4 Reading the phonology Cameroon English through the Trilateral Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Augustin Simo Bobda Chapter 5 One variety, di¤erent ethnic tongues: A phonological perspective on Nso’ English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy Chapter 6 The filtration processes in Cameroon English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eric A. Anchimbe Chapter 7 Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lilian Lem Atanga

29

63

77

99

117

141

x

Table of contents

Part II. Cameroon Pidgin English: Properties and history Chapter 8 Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anne Schro¨der Chapter 9 Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English: Formal and functional perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bonaventure M. Sala Chapter 10 Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka Chapter 11 Gud Nyus fo Pidgin?: Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Susanne Mu¨hleisen and Eric A. Anchimbe Chapter 12 German colonial influences on, and representations of, Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brigitte Weber

165

191

215

245

269

Part III. Texts and more texts Written and oral samples of Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compiled by Eric A. Anchimbe

299

Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Author index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subject index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

313 317 319

Introduction

Signpost at the University of Dschang, Cameroon

Chapter 1 Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Research approaches to Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English Eric A. Anchimbe 1. Overview All communities of people and their languages have known contact in one way or another in the course of their histories. Though to varying degrees, such contacts often leave traces on the communities and on the structures and uses of their languages. Cameroon has a special linguistic history typified by contacts of people and languages from various parts of the world. From the period of European trade on the coast of West Africa in the 14th and 15th centuries to colonialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, the contact of several peoples and languages has been attested in what is today called Cameroon. These peoples include Portuguese ivory and spices merchants, European slave traders, European and American religious missionaries, and of course, German, French and British colonialists in the last quarter of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. The linguistic outcomes of these contacts are many and have been extensively investigated. For instance, Portuguese words are still used in Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE) today, and several traces of German, as Weber’s chapter in this volume explains, are also still found in contemporary CPE. The indigenous languages have also been influenced by English and French and vice versa. Today, the languages co-existing in Cameroon are the two o‰cial languages, French and English, the widely spoken CPE (referred to by Mufwene (2001) as an expanded pidgin, and by Atindogbe´ and Chibaka in Chapter 10 as a Creole), and the over 270 indigenous languages. This book focuses on two of these languages, English and CPE, with the aim of illustrating the contemporary linguistic and social context of their evolution in Cameroon. The history and evolution of English in Cameroon and its contact with other languages, i.e. indigenous local languages, French and CPE, has been the topic of many publications since the 1960s, shortly after Cameroon

4

Eric A. Anchimbe

gained independence from France (1960) and Britain (1961). However, the focus on Cameroon English (CamE) as a variety of the language only started in the 1970s with the appearance of Mbassi-Manga’s works (Mbassi-Manga 1973, 1976b). Before the 1970s, attention was mainly on the classification of indigenous languages (e.g. Ardener 1956), the EnglishFrench state bilingualism policy, and multilingualism (e.g. Fonlon 1963, Mbassi-Manga 1964), the so-called ‘language problem’ in Cameroon (e.g. Ngijol 1964, Fonlon 1969), and the functions, structure and status of CPE (e.g. Kerkvliet 1957, Schneider 1960, 1963). There has been a strong focus on language contact and the linguistic phenomena resulting from it. All of the foci above have been significantly expanded upon in later linguistic research on Cameroon. Although some approaches and analytical frameworks seem to have remained static for a while, the amount of work done so far is commendable. Interestingly, CPE received far more research attention before CamE did, perhaps due to the fact that it was introduced in Cameroon long before educated English was. After Mbassi-Manga’s (1973, 1976a, 1976b) pioneering investigations on the emergence of CamE, a few other studies came up in the 1980s that placed the spotlight on the status, standards, distinctive features, and accents of English in Cameroon. One of those studies is Loreto Todd’s Cameroon (1982a). Todd’s volume was for long the only book length discussion of the contact history, varieties, and features of CamE. One other study that helped in the definition of CamE in terms of accepted speakers is Masanga’s (1983) doctoral thesis, which set the baseline for accepted CamE speakers as people who have completed secondary education. Masanga’s work is often quoted as a milestone in the debate on the emergence of a distinct variety of English in Cameroon. Other publications on the internal system of CamE in the 1980s include articles and book chapters on several facets of the variety, among them, Simo Bobda’s (1986) study of syllable stress in CamE and Mbangwana’s (1987) illustration of CamE phonology. On the sociolinguistic level, most of the chapters published in Koenig et al. (1983) focus on the place of English and CPE in the sociolinguistic landscape of the country. Todd’s (1982a) book traces the history of English in Cameroon and its development both before and after British colonisation. It provides many texts in CamE and CPE produced by Cameroonians. After each text, localised features which she refers to as Cameroonianisms are identified and explained, in some cases with standard British English (BrE) equivalences. Though in passing, the book also illustrates how deep-rooted English already was in Cameroon by 1884 when Cameroon was annexed by

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

5

Germany. As Todd (1982a: 9–10) says: ‘‘By 1884 the Baptist missionaries had established. . . 5 English-medium schools, which were highly regarded by Cameroonians and where the aim was to teach standard BrE’’. Taking this aim into consideration, is the emergence of CamE, therefore, an accident of history? Had the Germans not overtaken the British to annex Cameroon in 1884, would standard BrE have been learned and spoken in Cameroon? Whatever answers we give here make no di¤erence now because, far from this aim, a new variety of the language has taken root and is thriving in its new ecology. Its speakers speak it without remorse, and many of them already have it as first language. Since 1990, ten full length books have been published1 on various aspects of the variety, namely: Simo Bobda (1994a), Wolf (2001), Anchimbe (2006a), Ouafeu (2006a), Atechi (2006a), Kouega (2006, 2007), Ngefac (2008a), Mbangwana and Sala (2009), and recently, Nkemleke (2011). In 2007, Kouega published A Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage, which indicates that the variety has achieved substantial stability. Today, we could say that Wolf ’s and Anchimbe’s worries in the following excerpts about the number and salience of publications and theoretical frameworks on CamE within New Englishes research are being taken care of: ‘‘Cameroon English has been somewhat neglected in this field of New Englishes’’ (Wolf 2001: 15); ‘‘It would perhaps not be inappropriate to note here that up to date, no outright theory exists for discussing IVEs [Indigenised Varieties of English]’’ (Anchimbe 2006a: 18). The findings reported thus far are spread out both in entire books and (multi-focus) journals around the world. The authors in this volume have been involved in research on one or more aspects of CamE and/or CPE. As much as the work done so far is fascinating, I think studies are still needed that should give easy-to-access details about the current state, functions, acquisition patterns and statuses of CamE and CPE in Cameroon. Equally, we need new approaches and frameworks designed for postcolonial varieties of English with a focus on the mix and hybridising structure of their ecologies 1. I have not included unpublished PhD theses here. Many solid unpublished PhD theses have been written on specific aspects of CamE, for instance, Sala’s (2003) Aspects of the Cameroon English Sentence (University of Yaounde I). Sala’s work was the first extensive study of CamE syntax. In 2009, Sala coauthored Cameroon English Morphology and Syntax with Paul Mbangwana. My decision not to include theses in this classification of published works should not be taken to mean that I don’t find them important in the description of CamE.

6

Eric A. Anchimbe

(Mufwene 2001), internal systems, and evolutionary history. With such theoretical frameworks, these varieties will be studied as fruits of sociohistorically consistent societies and not as deviations or errors in the acquisition process, as much of the research in the 1990s seems to suggest.

2. Aim and scope of the book The aim of this book is three-fold: First, to investigate and account for various properties (grammatical, phonological, lexical and cognitivesociolinguistic) of CamE using new frameworks proposed within the field of New Englishes, e.g. the trilateral processes (Simo Bobda 1994a), the filtration processes (Anchimbe 2006a), and the cognitive sociolinguistic approach to World Englishes (Wolf 2008, Wolf and Polzenhagen 2009). By using these frameworks to analyse data from Cameroon, this volume adds a fresh dimension to research on CamE, since most previous studies concentrated on sociolinguistic and contrastive aspects and generally used only approaches based in language contact, bilingualism and multilingualism. Second, to identify and describe some grammatical properties (tense, aspect, reduplication and pronouns) of CPE, and to trace its use in both oral and written forms over time, stretching from German colonisation (1884– 1916) to present-day Bible translations. And third, to provide illustrative contemporary, naturally occurring CamE and CPE oral and written texts produced by Cameroonians. These three objectives are reflected in the three parts of the book: I) Cameroon English: properties and frameworks, II) Cameroon Pidgin English: properties and history, and III) Texts and more texts. Furthermore, the volume is intended to serve, however partially, as an update to Loreto Todd’s (1982a) pioneering volume, and also to encourage further research that approaches CamE and CPE in the light of current descriptions of World Englishes, New Englishes or Postcolonial Englishes and Pidgins and Creoles respectively.

3. Research approaches to Cameroon English Research on CamE only recently moved considerably away from the Anglocentric normative approach which consists in identifying and classifying those features in CamE that make it di¤erent from especially BrE. Although a few scholars still use this approach today, the field has expanded to include

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

7

systemic feature analysis involving intonation, morpho-syntax, lexical creation and innovation, phonological variation, and pragmatic choices. Several di¤erent approaches have been used in describing these and other aspects of CamE. I have tried to explain some of them here, but this is far from being exhaustive because some of the publications belong to more than one approach. As the discussion below illustrates, eleven major approaches can be identified in the general research on CamE. Some of the categories used below are based on Bolton’s (2005) classification of approaches to World Englishes (see also Wolf and Polzenhagen 2009). The first major approach is the English studies or Anglocentric (Anglistik) approach whose aim is to describe varieties of English by predominantly using methods in monolingual English analysis. It also uses terminology and analytical frameworks already established for native English in the study of non-native varieties. Bolton (2005: 70–71) links this approach to Randolph Quirk and David Crystal. In Cameroon, one could cite Todd (1982a), Mbangwana (1987), Simo Bobda and Mbangwana (1993), and Ngefac (2008a). In these studies, although to di¤ering degrees, statements on CamE are made in reference to what obtains in standard BrE. The interference approach was and is still highly used today. It treats CamE as a second language that is acquired with several complex substrate influences from the mother tongues. Most works in the approach have studied the impact of ethnic accents or ethnolects in the acquisition and production of CamE. Masanga’s (1983) work on Moghamo speakers could be said to be the major pioneering e¤ort in this approach. It was followed by many others, among them Tamfu (1989), Song (1996), Sala (1999), and Fonyuy (2003, this volume). Given that the search for a standard has been ongoing, a few studies (mostly dissertations) adopted the error analysis approach, which consists in identifying errors in the production of English by Cameroonians and proposing BrE corrections for them. Simo Bobda’s (1994b, 2002) Watch your English is a perfect example. It has been positively received by Cameroonian linguists and students alike. Other smaller scale works include Bafuh (1988) and Anchimbe (1998). In the early years of research on English in Cameroon, the Pidgin and Creole studies or creolistics approach was used. As mentioned above, Pidgin English in Cameroon attracted linguists’ and also non-linguists’ attention even before educated English was introduced in the country. There was, therefore, already a research tradition based on the study of mixed or contact languages when English was introduced. Moreover, it

8

Eric A. Anchimbe

was perhaps easier to look at English at the time as a form of ‘mixed language’ since as Mbassi-Manga (1976b: 62) says, CamE was basically Pidgin English þ educated English. A few works in this approach are Mbassi-Manga (1973) and Todd (1982a). A further important approach is the sociology of language approach generally identified with Joshua Fishman. As Bolton (2005: 71) explains, it involves ‘‘research on English in relation to such issues as language maintenance/shift and ethnolinguistic identity’’. As early as 1964, Ngijol identified CPE as having a negative influence on Cameroonians’ acquisition of both English and French. Similar complaints have been heard recently but rarely in research publications. The most glaring of them are the placards banning CPE on the campus of the University of Buea – one of them the cover image of this volume. Related to the above approach is the sociolinguistic approach which seeks to illustrate how people define themselves in terms of the language(s) they speak. A number of studies have shown how Cameroonians construct linguistic identities on English, French, CPE and the indigenous languages (Anchimbe 2006b, Mforteh 2007); how English is becoming a preferred first language for both anglophone and francophone children (Anchimbe 2005, Mforteh 2007, Fonyuy 2010); how social strata have been introduced based on knowledge of English (Ngefac 2007, 2008b); and how indigenous languages need to be used alongside English and French as mediums of education (Tadadjeu 1975, Ndamsa 2004, Tamanji 2008). These studies do not refer directly to CamE but rather to English as an o‰cial language in Cameroon. Also close to the sociology of language approach is the language planning approach. The focus here is, firstly, to call for the equal use of English in national administrative and formal domains with French (I. Ayafor 2001, Echu 2003) as stipulated by the constitution of the country. The argument has been that English is marginalized along with the anglophones for whom it is a first o‰cial language. The second focus has been to call for the codification or standardisation of CamE so that it can be used as the reference in ELT in Cameroon. The latter focus has been taken up by Atechi (2006b, 2008), Sala (2006), and Kouega (2007). The feature analysis approach came much later in the 2000s, and describes specific properties of CamE. Though in some cases reference is still made to BrE, the dominant aim has been to identify features that constitute the core of CamE independent of BrE. Initiated by Simo Bobda’s (1994a) phonological investigation, this approach has been used in describing other components like intonation (Ouafeu 2006a, 2007), grammar,

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

9

specifically syntax (Sala 2003, 2010), modal verbs (Nkemleke 2003, 2007), lexical restructuring (Anchimbe 2009a), and morpho-syntax (Mbangwana and Sala 2009). Some of these studies have also used a corpus linguistic approach, e.g. Nkemleke (2003) to identify and describe CamE features as they are used in natural situations. Another recent line of research in CamE research and also in New Englishes research is the design of theories or analytical frameworks to explain their features and structures. As noted earlier, because New Englishes generally lack clearly designed frameworks for describing their properties, frameworks designed for monolingual English-speaking contexts have often been used to account for phenomena in these multilingual settings. This notwithstanding, three recent frameworks have attempted to describe them from emic perspectives. These are Mufwene’s (2001) ‘competition and selection hypothesis’ and the ‘feature pool idea’ (Mufwene 1996), Schneider’s (2007) ‘dynamic model of postcolonial Englishes’, and Wolf ’s (2008) ‘cognitive sociolinguistic approach to World Englishes’. In Cameroon, a few frameworks have been proposed that focus on the specificities of the ecology in the evolution of CamE. These are Simo Bobda’s (1994a) ‘trilateral process’, revisited in Chapter 4 of this book, Sala’s (2003) ‘grafting-over-transfer hypothesis’, and Anchimbe’s (2006a) ‘filtration processes’ discussed in Chapter 6. These frameworks highlight the consistency of certain major linguistic processes in CamE. Neglected for a long time in New Englishes research is the social interaction approach, based on pragmatics and discourse analysis. Only a few studies have consciously adopted this approach, e.g. the papers in the symposium section of the journal World Englishes Vol. 10, No. 3, edited by Yamuna Kachru in 1991 entitled Speech Acts in World Englishes, and articles on requests in varieties of South African English by Kasanga (2003, 2006). These are too few compared to the amount of literature on the other linguistic components, e.g. lexis, phonology and semantics. Recently, a new impetus was given to this approach in Cameroon by the publication of Mulo Farenkia’s (2008) edited volume Linguistic Politeness in Cameroon and Anchimbe and Janney’s (2011) Postcolonial Pragmatics (Journal of Pragmatics 43,6). Other publications in this approach include Ouafeu (2006b) on pragmatic particles in CamE, Mforteh (2006) on hedging and the construction of social distance in political discourse in Cameroon, Echu (2008) on address strategies in CPE, and Anchimbe (2008, 2011) on naming strategies and the negotiation of respect and deference in CamE. The lexicographic approach which involves the compilation of dictionaries and encyclopaedias only recently started in CamE with the publication of

10

Eric A. Anchimbe

Kouega’s (2007) Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage. Though the dictionary is not elaborate and does not take into account regional variation, it at least indicates that progress is being made in the description of the variety. While much is still left undone, the inclusion of the cultural and conceptual background in dictionary or encyclopaedic compilations proposed by Wolf (this volume) is highly commendable since it resolves the problem in New Englishes research where words identified as having new meanings in specific New Englishes contexts are often attested to have existed in the history of the language in Britain or elsewhere. Such an approach also helps to explain words and meanings for which a clear semantic motivation is not available on the normal linguistic level.

4. Research approaches to Cameroon Pidgin English The bulk of studies on CPE have been on its history, sociolinguistic status, and attitudes towards it. A few investigations of its structural properties, however, exist; one of the most recent being a PhD thesis by Bazergui (1997). Mbassi-Manga’s (1973) PhD thesis entitled English in Cameroon: A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends, is one of the earliest detailed study of the status and functions of CPE, even though the title rather refers to ‘English’ and not ‘Pidgin’. From this early study to Schro¨der’s (2003a) recent investigation, at least seven approaches can be identified. These range from descriptions of the emergence of a Pidgin in Cameroon to issues of orthography and terminology. The first of these approaches is the pidginisation approach. The major aim of studies classified under this approach is to establish that a Pidgin with a describable system of grammar and lexis exists in Cameroon. Most of the early studies of CPE used this approach, and are often credited for the initial descriptions of its grammar, e.g. Schneider (1966) and Todd (1969, 1979). Additionally, they identified general grammatical features of CPE, e.g. the pronominal system and the syntactic structures, and traced the etymologies of CPE words, supporting these with examples from various oral and written sources. Other studies, especially Schneider’s (1960) Cameroons Creole Dictionary, considered CPE at this early period a Creole. Some more of these early studies looked at CPE as part of the bigger West African Pidgin English, e.g. Schneider (1963, 1966), Dwyer (1966), and Todd (1969, 1979). The above approach was followed much later by feature analytical approaches that describe the grammatical system of CPE in synchronic

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

11

time. Some of them, e.g. Todd (1991) still place CPE within the broader West African Pidgin English language community. But later studies describe specific aspects of CPE using data collected in Cameroon. Among them are Schro¨der’s (2003b) investigation of CPE aspect, Bazergui’s (1997) study of CPE syntax, Fe´ral’s (1989) description of CPE grammar. But as Wolf (2001) and Schro¨der (2003a) say, the number of studies on CPE grammar is still limited compared to next door Nigerian Pidgin English. Another approach that has been extensively used in describing CPE is the Anglocentric approach which entails comparing CPE to Standard English or describing features of CPE in terms of Standard English. This approach uses mostly monolingual English description terminologies and categories and often compares the grammatical system of CPE to that of Standard English. The works of M. Ayafor (2004, 2008), Menang (2004), Atindogbe´ and Fogwe (this volume), etc. fall under this category. The most frequently used approach to CPE is the sociolinguistic approach wherein CPE is described in its multilingual context with focus on its functions and status, e.g. Todd (1982b), M. Ayafor (2000), Schro¨der (2003a), Mbangwana (1983); attitudes towards it, e.g. Kouega (2001), Schro¨der (2003a), M. Ayafor (2006); and social identification with it, e.g. Chia (1980), Jesse (2001). Negative attitudes towards CPE are noted in these studies which also present CPE as an informal, non-written language. The pedagogic or language teaching approach has also been used by a few studies that seek to teach CPE. The first of them was produced by Gunther von Hagen in 1908 during the German colonial period and was aimed at explaining common CPE words and phrases used by Cameroonians, the Kru boys and others to German soldiers and colonial o‰cers posted to Kamerun. In the 20th century after colonialism had ended, a few other CPE teaching manuals were published for Peace Corps volunteers arriving Cameroon from abroad, e.g. Dwyer’s (1966) An Introduction to West African Pidgin English and Bellama et al.’s (1983) Introduction to Cameroonian Pidgin English. The only other non-Peace Corps pedagogic works on CPE to our knowledge are Schneider’s (1963) foregrounding book First steps in Wes-Kos and Todd’s (1991) Talk Pidgin: A Structured Course in West African Pidgin English. A few works have tried to propose orthographies for CPE. The orthographic approach does not explicitly call for the standardisation of CPE in some form but rather advances ways in which the spelling system could be uniformised and standardised. The two main studies in this regard are M. Ayafor (1996) and Sala (2009). Though M. Ayafor’s orthography

12

Eric A. Anchimbe

appeared over 15 years ago, it has not been used in any major written works in CPE. The recent Gud Nyus fo ol Pipul (2000), a translation of the New Testament into CPE published in 2000, rather adopts phonemic spellings and not the mixture of phonemic and English-based spellings proposed by M. Ayafor (1996). For more on the orthography issue in CPE, see Mu¨hleisen and Anchimbe (Chapter 11, this volume). One of the oldest approaches used to establish the emergence and circumscribe the lexicon of CPE is the lexicographic approach. Hagen’s Handbook also consists of a glossary along with translations and explanations in German. Schneider’s (1960) Cameroons Creole Dictionary and Kouega’s (2008) Dictionary of Cameroon Pidgin English Usage both belong to this category. Although these dictionaries lack phonetic and etymological information, they could be considered as initial steps in a more stable lexicographical tradition. Finally, a number of authors have been concerned with terminological issues concerning the label ‘Cameroon Pidgin English’. Several names have been used by various researchers to call CPE, among them, Cameroon Creole (Schneider 1960), Wes-Kos (Schneider 1963), West African Pidgin English (Dwyer 1966, Schneider 1966), Cameroon Pidgin (CamP) (Todd 1982a, Schro¨der 2003a), and Kamtok (Ngome 1986, Mbangwana 1991, Todd and Jumbam 1992, Ayafor 1996, 2000). Two terms have, however, been commonly used; Cameroon Pidgin (English) and Kamtok. Alobwede (2009: 80) addresses the issue of names for CPE in the paper ‘‘Can Cameroon Pidgin English be re-named Kamtok?’’ After explaining the suitability of the term CPE, he rejects the term Kamtok on the basis that it ‘‘does not reflect the origin, functions and inter-intelligibility of CPE with other varieties of West African Pidgin English’’ and is, therefore, ‘‘too remote to be accepted’’ (p. 73). Both terms still continue to be used, sometimes by the same authors, e.g. Loreto Todd has used most of these terms in di¤erent publications. The naming issue is not, therefore, a controversy within research circles.

5. Introducing native speakers of CamE and CPE: Challenges for future research One criterion that changes the status of a second language is when it acquires native speakers, i.e. when it becomes a first language for many people. The New Englishes have not yet been elaborately described from this perspective, i.e. in relation to those who now speak them as their L1.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

13

A reason for this, Anchimbe (2009b) believes, is the misconception that these Englishes are not yet mature. A few studies that grade New Englishes on a scale of maturation include Simo Bobda (1994b: iv), Trudgill (1995: 316), and Ngefac (2005: 50). If maturation depended only on the emergence of L1 users of New Englishes, then we can now say these Englishes have reached that stage, whatever it is. However, the existence of these L1 or native speakers calls for new approaches to, and perspectives on, New Englishes since most existing approaches highlight language contact, the impact of substratal languages and second language acquisition. Several chapters in this volume adopt this innovative focus and, hence, use data collected from native speakers of CamE and CPE. Having been used in Cameroon by people of almost all walks of life and in various forms for almost a century now, English has become a first language for a part of the population. Generations of Cameroonians have been surveyed since the 1980s who say English is their first language. I will refer to two surveys to ascertain this. First, Mbangwana (1983: 87) reports on children between the ages of four and ten years who have English or CPE as their first language in five urban centres in Cameroon: Douala, Bamenda, Mamfe, Buea and Yaounde (Table 1). The percentage of children who have English as L1 is low during this period. For instance, in Bamenda, a major anglophone town, it is only 1%. Buea, another anglophone town has the highest percentage (7%), followed by Mamfe (anglophone) and Yaounde (francophone), both scoring 4%. Possible reasons for these percentages are: 1) there were only a few nursery schools and so children only encountered English later in primary schools from the age of six, and 2) the international pull of English as the world’s lingua franca was not yet felt; parents, therefore, did not really insist on teaching their children only English as it has been the case since the late 1990s. A later survey by Anchimbe (2009a) conducted in 2003 (Table 2) with adults in the age range 19–45 years in three towns (Bamenda, Buea and Yaounde) reveals startling results about English as L1. Bamenda scores 39%, a significant increase from 1983. In all three towns in Anchimbe’s survey, there is an increase in the acquisition of English as L1 between 1983 and 2003. In contrast to this, there is a significant decrease in the acquisition of CPE as L1 between the two periods. Yaounde is a case in point: from 31% in 1983 to 0% in 2003. It could be argued that Yaounde is not an anglophone town, but the trend is not di¤erent in the anglophone towns either. As above, Buea drops from 26% in 1983 to 2.2% and Bamenda from 25% to 1.5% in 2003. This apparently shows how linguistic identities built on CPE and English

14

Eric A. Anchimbe

Table 1. CPE and English as L1 for children in 1979–1980 (Mbangwana 1983: 87) Town

Total population

Pidgin English

Standard English

#

%

#

Douala

585

131

22

7

1

Bamenda

585

146

25

6

1

Mamfe

128

25

19.5

5

4

Buea

254

66

26

19

7

Yaounde

500

154

31

21

4

%

Table 2. L1 Speakers of English as L1 in Cameroon in 2003 (Anchimbe 2009a) Town

Total

English

Pidgin English

Indig. language

English & indig. lang.

Other

#

%

#

%

#

#

#

%

11

15.7

%

Yaounde

70

23

32.8

0

0

30

42.8

6

Buea

89

17

19

2

2.2

52

58.4

9

Bamenda

64

25

39

1

1.5

28

43.7

5

223

65

Total

3

110

20

% 8.5 10 7.8

9 5

10 7.8

25

have swapped between these two periods. Apparently, no one wants to overtly identify with CPE now although it is still exceedingly used by most anglophones. It has become better or more prestigious to identify with English. While these claims tell us something about attitudes towards English and CPE, they should be taken carefully because they may not always reflect actual language use. The increase in L1 speakers of English indicates that gradually there is a class of people who could e¤ectively stand as reference points for the standard of CamE. What this means is that we could expect to see a further stabilisation of the forms, features and structures of the variety on which codification and standardisation could be based. With increasing attention being paid to lexicography, it is expected that CamE finds its place among other extensively described and documented varieties of the language. The new perspectives presented in this book are intended to facilitate this and encourage more systematic descriptions of features and phenomena in the variety.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

15

6. Structure of the volume This book is structured into three parts that focus on each of the major objectives set above: properties of, and analytical frameworks for, CamE (Part I); properties and uses of CPE over time and in di¤erent forms (Part II); and illustrative naturally occurring oral and written texts in CamE and CPE (Part III). Bringing together investigations of and sample texts in these two languages, this volume wishes to illustrate how distinctly they have developed over the past 35 years, especially given that MbassiManga (1976b) described CamE as a continuum from Pidgin English to educated English. However, the increasing number of native speakers of these languages and the scope of the innovative investigations of their properties in this volume signal the necessity for more emic, varietyspecific descriptions of both their sociolinguistic context and grammatical systems. The chapters contribute to this goal but are far from covering all aspects of the grammar of CamE and CPE. 6.1. Part I. Cameroon English: Properties and frameworks The six papers in this part evaluate the use of modals in CamE, describe certain grammatical, phonological and lexical properties of CamE, apply recent analytic frameworks pertaining to New Englishes to CamE, and position the variety in its multilingual context. The conclusions are based on the use of corpora, e.g. the under-construction ICE-Cameroon corpus (see Nkemleke 2009), and surveys of the use of CamE in various institutional and non-institutional settings including the parliament, schools and the radio. In chapter 2, The expression of modality in Cameroon English, Daniel N. Nkemleke demonstrates that modality is less frequently expressed in CamE when compared to BrE, and that from a general point of view ‘‘there appears to be strong tendencies for specialisation and/or restriction in the use of these modal forms’’. These conclusions are arrived at after a corpus-based investigation of central modals, epistemic adverbials, adjectives and lexical modal verbs in the 820,554 word corpus of CamE. Hans-Georg Wolf in Chapter 3, The cognitive sociolinguistic approach to Cameroon English and other World Englishes: A lexicological application, o¤ers a cognitive sociolinguistic analysis of certain CamE words and concepts, illustrating how these could be integrated as entries into a CamE variety dictionary or thesaurus. The aim of the approach, he says, is to resolve the ‘‘lexicological problem of representing conceptual information

16

Eric A. Anchimbe

and making such information maximally explicit in a variety dictionary’’. The sample dictionary he proposes is made up of two components: 1) the standard description and the underlying conceptual domain of an entry and 2) a thesaurus-like section with key domains and salient conceptualisations of an entry. In Chapter 4, Reading the phonology of New Englishes through the trilateral process: Focus on Cameroon English, Augustin Simo Bobda revisits his notion of the ‘trilateral process’ initially proposed in Simo Bobda (1994a) and further explained in Simo Bobda and Chumbow (1999), but extends it this time to other New Englishes. Applying it to CamE using words like increment, tempest, poetry, and tomorrow, he concludes that the trilateral process highlights the autonomy of New Englishes by o¤ering innovative and illuminating accounts of their phonological systems. Chapter 5, One variety, di¤erent ethnic tongues: A phonological perspective of Nso’ English by Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy, is a description and categorisation of ethnic varieties of English in Cameroon. It focuses on the resilience or retention of certain Lamnso’-based phonological features in Nso’ English and the sociolinguistic attitudes that go with this ethnic variety. Using data gathered from Lamnso’ native speakers of various ages, Fonyuy identifies certain stable or stabilising vocalic features which are attributable to a Nso’ ethnolect of CamE. From a predominantly sociolinguistic perspective, she makes a case for the recognition of ethnic varieties because, as she insists, ‘‘ethnic accents can neither be homogenised nor can they be completely extinct’’. Eric A. Anchimbe in Chapter 6, The filtration processes in Cameroon English, applies his notion of the ‘filtration processes’, specifically the ‘(linguistic) integrational filtration’ initially proposed in Anchimbe (2006a), to certain CamE words. This framework shows how speech patterns (attitudinal) and linguistic forms (integrational) are filtered into the standard of CamE in such a way that ‘‘those features that finally enter the norm of the language or variety are describable as belonging to the standard’’. He makes the distinction between additive and replacive elements and illustrates that words like manyi (mother of twins) and ekwang (local food) easily become part of the standard because they are additive, i.e. they are present in the ecology in which English now exists. But others like stranger for guest have to compete for a place in the semantic repertory of the variety. Moving away from specific grammatical features of CamE, Lem Lilan Atanga in Chapter 7, Language choice, identity and power in the Cameroonian parliament, examines language choice in parliamentary discourse in

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

17

Cameroon from a critical discourse analysis perspective. She links the linguistic choices (between English and French) of parliamentarians to the identities they attach to these two languages, their political parties, the topics they cover, and the power positions or relations they want to exercise. These identities, she explains, are not static since the MPs keep switching between them for one reason or another each time they decide to use English rather than French or vice versa. 6.2. Part II. Cameroon Pidgin English: Properties and history Given that many negative attitudes are still being expressed towards CPE, this part is dedicated to investigating its internal grammatical system, specifically its tense and aspect system (Chapter 8), its reduplication system (Chapter 9), its pronominal system (Chapter 10), its lexical and syntactic elaboration in written form (Chapter 11), and German colonial influences on it (Chapter 12). This focus also aims to show how the systems of CPE and CamE have drifted apart in spite of Mbassi-Manga’s (1976b) claims of a continuum between the two, and how they have also stabilised into an independent Creole and a variety of English respectively. It is hoped that this would initiate further typological research on this Creole which up to now, as shown in section 4 above, has not received significant investigation beyond sociolinguistic descriptions of its functions and spread. Anne Schro¨der, using the TMA questionnaire designed by Dahl (1985), carries out a profound investigation of the tense and aspect system of CPE in Chapter 8 entitled, Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English. Taking o¤ from the premise that ‘‘concepts of time and thus of the tense and aspect systems of a language are culture specific and therefore should be described using language-independent methods’’, she comes up with a classification of the tense and aspect system of CPE as consisting, among other things, ‘‘of four preverbal markers of tense and aspect’’ namely go, bin, di and don/neba. In Chapter 9, Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English, Bonaventure M. Sala uses both formal and functional perspectives to explain the di¤erent patterns of reduplication in CPE and the grammatical and semantic functions they play. The analysis is strengthened by the identification of the tonal patterns that mark the various classes of the reduplicated words and the functions these play in CPE. In conclusion, he states that categories such as intensification, limitation, aspect, and one-to-one mapping, which in English are normally lexicalised or marked by clear-cut morphemes and expressions, are rather realised in CPE using reduplication.

18

Eric A. Anchimbe

An illuminating description of the pronoun system of CPE is o¤ered by Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka in Chapter 10, Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English. Although they make references to the pronominal system of English and use terminology related to traditional English syntactic analysis, they, however, illustrate clearly that CPE has a distinct pronoun system in which, for instance, interrogation is not often marked by the use of an interrogative pronoun but by a combination of tonal and sentence structure elements. From a classificatory stance they treat CPE as a Creole since it already has generations of native speakers and a su‰ciently stable grammatical system. Chapter 11, Gud Nyus fo Pidgin? Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English, by Susanne Mu¨hleisen and Eric A. Anchimbe deals with CPE in writing and illustrates how several aspects of the language have been elaborated in the course of the CPE translation of the New Testament. Language elaboration, the chapter explains, takes place when existing literature from other cultures has to be translated into a language that is fundamentally oral. Using the Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul (2000) New Testament, they illustrate processes of elaboration at the level of orthography, lexical creation, and grammar. The last chapter of this volume by Brigitte Weber, German colonial influences on, and representations of, Cameroon Pidgin English, takes us into history to situate the place and impact of German and the Germans in the evolution of CPE lexicon and grammar. Using several examples from German missionaries and colonialists in Cameroon, Weber captures the attitude of the Germans towards CPE, their use of the language, and how they influenced its evolution and development at this stage. Her examples are mostly drawn from Hagen’s (1908) Handbook. Loosely called ‘Neger Englisch’ (Negro English) by the Germans, CPE maintained a relatively consistent existence during the German colonial period. Weber provides certain surviving influences at the level of phonology, lexis and syntax. Such historical typological investigations are important if we have to trace the changes which CPE, just like CamE, has undergone in the course of its evolution. 6.3. Part III: Texts and more texts This part contains present-day spoken and written CamE and CPE texts. They are included here to help us understand the changes that have taken place in these languages over time, e.g. since Todd’s (1982a) text-based volume on CamE in the ‘‘Varieties of English around the World’’ series.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

19

The oral CamE text is a transcription of a group interview involving two people: a male teacher (38 years old) and a female journalist (27 years old) I conducted in Bamenda (September 2009). The written CamE text is culled from the interactive website of The Post (No. 003/2009 of Monday 2 March 2009) – a major English-medium bi-weekly private newspaper in Cameroon. The text includes readers’ comments on the news story and reactions to other readers’ comments. This gives us a twin perspective: the reporters’ and the ordinary Cameroonians’ as they use CamE in written interaction. The oral CPE text is a transcription of the Radio Bamenda 15 minute programme ‘‘E Fine for Sabi’’ (It is Good to Know) of 10 August 2009, hosted by Grace Che. Two written CPE texts are also provided here, the first from the religious domain taken out of the CPE New Testament, Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul (Matthew 7: 1–20), and the second from the literary domain, a poem ‘‘Wata pass garri’’ by Peter Vakuntah (2008). These are the two major written domains in which CPE has been used extensively. 7. Concluding remarks A volume like this one can hardly be an exhaustive description of CamE and/or CPE. In spite of the attempts made to cover as many areas as possible, much is still left uninvestigated or under-investigated. However, I hope the perspectives adopted and the frameworks proposed here will o¤er readers a glimpse of the rich background in which CamE and CPE exist. It is also hoped more in-depth studies will follow those presented here, and that we will have a better grasp of processes and phenomena in not only CamE but also other New Englishes. It is true that several chapters in this volume still make allusion to, or compare features of CamE to BrE, when it was thought they would diverge completely. This is normal for the stage which research on CamE is at. At a later stage when the frameworks presented will be applied to specific data and specific language use domains, this umbilical reference to BrE will be cut. It simply tells us that much is still to be done as far as analytical frameworks and patterns of data analysis are concerned. References Alobwede, d’Epie C. 2009. Can Cameroon Pidgin English be re-named Kamtok? Annals of the Faculty of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, University of Yaounde 1. Special Edition: Festschrift in honour of Professor Paul N. Mbangwana. 73– 81.

20

Eric A. Anchimbe

Anchimbe, Eric A. 1998. English in Cameroon: A Study of the Deviant Syntactic Forms of Students of the University of Yaounde I. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde I. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2005. Anglophonism and francophonism: The stakes of (o‰cial) language identity in Cameroon. Alizes: Revue Angliciste de la Re´union 25/26: 7–26. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006a. Cameroon English: Authenticity, Ecology and Evolution. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006b. Hybrid linguistic identities in postcolonial Africa: The intricacy of identity opportunism in multilingual Cameroon. In: Heidemann, Frank and Alfonso de Toro (eds.), New Hybridities: Societies and Cultures in Transition. Leipzig: Olms Verlag. 237–261. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2008. ‘Come greet uncle Eric’: Politeness through kinship terms. In: Mulo Farenkia, Bernard (ed.), pp. 109–120. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2009a. Post-integrational restructuring of new lexical elements in Cameroon English. Annals of the Faculty of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, University of Yaounde 1. Special edition, Festschrift in Honour of Professor Paul N. Mbangwana. 83–100. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2009b. Revisiting the notion of maturation in new Englishes. World Englishes 28(3): 337–352. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2011. On not calling people by their names: Pragmatic undertones of sociocultural relationships in a postcolony. Journal of Pragmatics 43(6): 1472–1483. Anchimbe, Eric A. and Richard W. Janney (eds.). 2011. Postcolonial Pragmatics. Special issue, Journal of Pragmatics 43(6): 1451–1539. Ardener, Edwin W. 1956. Coastal Bantu of Cameroon. London: International African Institute. Atechi, Samuel N. 2006a. The Intelligibility of Native and Non-native English Speech: A Comparative Analysis of Cameroon English and American and British English. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Atechi, Samuel N. 2006b. Which model? The dilemma of the teacher and the learner of English in the non-native English classroom: The case of Cameroon. In: Mbangwana, Paul et al. (eds.), pp. 109–120. Atechi, Samuel N. 2008. The major causes of communication breakdown between native and non native speakers of English: Some pedagogical implications. In: Harrow, Kenneth and Kizitus Mpoche (eds.), Language, Literature and Education in Multicultural Societies: Collaborative Research on Africa. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 262–282. Ayafor, Isaiah M. 2001. Language planning, flexibility in lexical usage and the status of English in Cameroon. In: Kiselman, Christer and Geraldo Mattos (eds.), Language Planning and Lexicology: Proceedings of an International Symposium. Zagreb: Akademio de Esperanto. 11–33. Ayafor, Miriam. 1996. An orthography for Kamtok. English Today 12(4): 53–57. Ayafor, Miriam. 2000. Kamtok: The ultimate unifying language for Cameroon. The Carrier Pidgin 28(1–3): 4–6.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

21

Ayafor, Miriam. 2004. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Morphology and syntax. In: Kortmann, Bernd, Kate Burridge, Rajend Mesthrie, Edgar W. Schneider and Clive Upton (eds.), A Handbook of Varieties of English: Vol. 2. Morphology and Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 909–928. Ayafor, Miriam. 2006. Kamtok (Pidgin) is gaining ground in Cameroon. In: Chia, Emmanuel (ed.), African Linguistics and the Development of African Communities. Dakar, Senegal: CODESRIA. 191–199. Ayafor, Miriam. 2008. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Morphology and syntax. In: Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.), Varieties of English, Volume 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 428–450. Bafuh, Elaine K. 1988. Paralanguage and Prosodic Features in the Oral Production of the CRTV: A Study in Error Analysis. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Bazergui, Nives. 1997. A Descriptive Account of Cameroonian Pidgin English: A Principles and Parameters Approach. PhD Thesis, University of Essex. Bellama, David, Solomon Nkwele and Joseph Yudom. 1983. Introduction to Cameroonian Pidgin English. Yaounde: Peace Corps Cameroon. Bolton, Kingsley. 2005. Where WE stands: Approaches, issues, and debate in world Englishes. World Englishes 24(1): 69–83. ¨ sten. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell. Dahl, O Dwyer, David. 1966. An Introduction to West African Pidgin English. Michigan State University: African Studies Center. Echu, George. 2003. Coping with multilingualism: Trends in the evolution of language policy in Cameroon. PhiN – Philologie im Netz 25: 31–46. http:// www.fu-berlin.de/phin/x/dir.cgi?ptest. Accessed 10 January 2006. Echu, George. 2008. Forms of address as a politeness strategy in Cameroon Pidgin English. In: Mulo Farenkia, Bernard (ed.), pp. 121–133. Fe´ral, Carole de. 1989. Pidgin-English du Cameroun: Description Linguistique et Sociolinguistique. Paris : Peeters/Selaf. Fonlon, Bernard N. 1963. A case for early bilingualism. ABBIA 4: 56–94. Fonlon, Bernard N. 1969. The language problem in Cameroon. ABBIA 22: 5–40. Fonyuy, Ernesta K. 2003. The Evolution of some Vowel Pronunciation Features in Lamnso’ Speakers’ English along the Educational Ladder. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde 1. Fonyuy, Ernesta K. 2010. The rush for English education in urban Cameroon: Sociolinguistic implications and prospects. English Today 26(1): 32–40. Hagen, Gunther von. 1908. Kurzes Handbuch fu¨r Neger-Englisch an der Westku¨ste Afrikas unter besonderer Beru¨cksichtigung von Kamerun. Berlin: Dingeldey & Werres. Jesse, Moba. 2001. Cook stew of pidgin. English Today 17(3): 45–51. Kasanga, Luanga A. 2003. ‘I am asking for a pen’: Framing of requests in black South African English. In: Jaszczolt, Kasia M. and Ken Turner (eds.), Meaning through Language Contrast, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 213–235. Kasanga, Luanga A. 2006. Requests in a South African variety of English. World Englishes 25(1): 65–89.

22

Eric A. Anchimbe

Kerkvliet, Arnold. 1957. Pidgin English Catechism. Rome: Sodality of St. Peter Claver. Koenig, Edna L., Emmanuel Chia and John Povey (eds.). 1983. A Sociolinguistic Profile of Urban Centres in Cameroon. Los Angeles: Crossroads Press. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2001. Pidgin English facing death in Cameroon. Langscape 21:11–22. www.terralingua.org/publications/Langscape/LS21.pdf. Accessed 20 January 2008. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2006. Aspects of Cameroon English Usage: A Lexical Appraisal. Munich: LINCOM. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2007. A Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2008. A Dictionary of Cameroon Pidgin English Usage: Pronunciation, Grammar and Vocabulary. Munich: LINCOM. Masanga, David. 1983. The Spoken English of Educated Moghamo People: A Phonological Study. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1983. The scope and role of Pidgin English in Cameroon. In: Koenig, Edna et al. (eds.), pp. 79–91. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1987. Some characteristics of sound patterns of Cameroon Standard English. Multilingua 6(4): 411–424. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1991. Kamtok is achieving its lettres de noblesse. Lore and Language 10(2): 59–65. Mbangwana, Paul N., Kizitus Mpoche and Tennu Mbuh (eds.). 2006. Language, Literature and Identity. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Mbangwana, Paul N. and Bonaventure M. Sala. 2009. Cameroon English Morphology and Syntax: Current Trends in Action. Munich: LINCOM. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1964. Cameroon: A marriage of three cultures. ABBIA 5: 131–144. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon: A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Leeds. Mbassi-Manga, Francis (ed.). 1976a. Cameroon Studies in English and French (CASEF). Victoria: Presbook. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1976b. The state of contemporary English in Cameroon. In: Mbassi-Manga, Francis (ed.), pp. 49–63. Menang, Thaddeus. 2004. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Phonology. In: Schneider, Edgar W., Kate Burridge, Bernd Kortmann, Rajend Mesthrie and Clive Upton (eds.), A Handbook of Varieties of English. Vol. 1: Phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 902–917. Mforteh, Stephen A. 2006. Hedging as a persuasive tool in Cameroon leadership discourse. South South Journal of Culture and Development 8(2): 93–123. Mforteh, Stephen A. 2007. In search of new identities in multilingual Cameroon. In: Anchimbe, Eric A. (ed.), Linguistic Identity in Postcolonial Multilingual Spaces. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 87–101. Mforteh, Stephen A. 2009. Linguistic distancing in Cameroonian discourse. Epasa Moto: A Bilingual Journal of Arts, Letters and the Humanities 4(1): 105–123.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

23

Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1996. Creole genesis: A population genetics perspective. In: Christie, Pauline (ed.), Caribbean Language Issues: Old and New. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press. 168–209. Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mulo Farenkia, Bernard (ed.). 2008. De la politesse linguistique au Cameroun. Linguistic Politeness in Cameroon. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Ndamsa, Gratiana L. 2004. The language of education: The co-existence between mother tongue and o‰cial languages in Cameroon. CASTALIA 19: 43–50. Ngefac, Aloysius. 2005. Homophones and heterophones in Cameroon English. Alize´s: Revue Angliciste de la Re´union 25/26: 39–53. Ngefac, Aloysius. 2008a. Social Di¤erentiation in Cameroon English. New York: Peter Lang. Ngefac, Aloysius. 2008b. The social stratification of English in Cameroon. World Englishes 27(3–4): 407–418. Ngefac, Aloysius and Bonaventure M. Sala. 2006. Cameroon Pidgin and Cameroon English at a confluence: A real time investigation. English World-Wide 27(2): 217–227. Ngijol, Pierre. 1964. Ne´cessite´ d’une langue nationale. ABBIA 7: 83–99. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2003. A Corpus-based Study of the Modal Verbs in Cameroon Written English. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Yaounde I. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2007. Frequency and use of modals in Cameroon English. Lagos Papers in English Studies 2: 47–61. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2009. Milestones in the corpus of Cameroon English: Research possibilities in an ESL context. Annals of the Faculty of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, University of Yaounde 1. Special edition, Festschrift in Honour of Professor Paul N. Mbangwana. 173–188. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2011. Exploring Academic Writing in Cameroon English: A Corpus-based Perspective. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier Verlag. Ouafeu, Yves Talla Sando. 2006a. Intonational Meaning in Cameroon English Discourse: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Ouafeu, Yves Talla Sando. 2006b. Politeness strategies in colloquial Cameroon English: Focus on three pragmatic particles: na, ya and eihn. Nordic Journal of African Studies 15(4): 536–544. www.njas.helsinki.fi/pdf-files/vol15num4/ sando.pdf. Accessed 5 June 2008. Ouafeu, Yves Talla Sando. 2007. Intonational marking of new and given information in Cameroon English. English World-Wide 28(2): 187–199. Sala, Bonaventure M. 1999. Aspects of Lamnso’ Speakers’ English Pronunciation. Unpublished DIPES II Dissertation. ENS Yaounde, University of Yaounde 1. Sala, Bonaventure M. 2003. Aspects of the Cameroon English Sentence. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Yaounde I. Sala, Bonaventure M. 2006. Does Cameroonian English have grammatical norms? English Today 22(4): 59–64. Sala, Bonaventure M. 2009. Writing in Cameroon Pidgin English: Begging the question. English Today 25(2): 11–17.

24

Eric A. Anchimbe

Sala, Bonaventure M. 2010. That-adverbials in Cameroon English. World Englishes 29(1): 127–137. Schneider, Gilbert D. 1960. Cameroons Creole Dictionary. Bamenda, West Cameroon: Cameroon Baptist Mission. Schneider, Gilbert D. 1963. First Steps in Wes-Kos. Connecticut: Cyclostyled Hartford. Schneider, Gilbert D. 1966. West African Pidgin English: A Descriptive Linguistic Analysis with Texts from the Cameroon Area. Athens, Ohio: Hartford Seminary Foundation. Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003a. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English. An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Gunter Narr. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003b. Aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English. In: Lucko, Peter, Lother Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English. Berlin: Lang. pp. 83–100. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1986. Syllable stress in Cameroon Standard English. Annals of the Faculty of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, University of Yaounde II(1): 179–197. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994a. Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Berne: Peter Lang. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994b. Watch your English: A Collection of Remedial Lessons on English Usage. Yaounde: Atelier Materiel Audio-Visuel. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2002. Watch your English: A Collection of Remedial Lessons on English Usage. 2nd ed. Yaounde: B&K Language Institute. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Beban S. Chumbow. 1999. The trilateral process in Cameroon English phonology: Underlying representations and phonological processes in non-native Englishes. English World-Wide 20(1): 35–65. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Paul N. Mbangwana. 1993. An Introduction to Spoken English. Lagos: University of Lagos Press. Song, Priscilla N. 1996. The Spoken English of some Educated Kom People: A Phonological Study. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde 1. Tadadjeu, Maurice. 1975. Language planning in Cameroon: Toward a trilingual education system. In: Herbert, Robert K. (ed.), Patterns in Language, Culture, and Society: Sub-Saharan Africa. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University. 53– 75. Tamanji, Pius. 2008. A success story in o‰cial bilingualism: Lessons for a mother tongue based multilingual education programme in Cameroon. Revue Internationale des Arts, Lettres et Sciences Sociales 1(2): 151–172. Tamfu, Mushing W. 1989. The Spoken English of some Educated Wimbum People: A Study in Vowel Variation. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Todd, Loreto. 1969. Pidgin English of West Cameroon. CAMELANG 1(1): 35– 57.

Language contact in a postcolonial setting: Cameroon English and Pidgin

25

Todd, Loreto. 1979. Some Day Been Dey: West African Pidgin Folktales. London: Roudedge & Kegan Paul. Todd, Loreto. 1982a. Cameroon. (Varieties of English around the World. T1). Heidelberg: Groos. Todd, Loreto. 1982b. English in Cameroon: Education in a multilingual society. In: Pride, John B. (ed.), New Englishes. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 119– 137. Todd, Loreto. 1991. Talk Pidgin: A Structured Course in West African Pidgin English. Leeds: Tortoise Books. Todd, Loreto and Martin Jumbam. 1992. Kamtok: Anatomy of a Pidgin. English Today 8(1): 3–11. Trudgill, Peter. 1995. Linguistic oppression and the non-native speaker. Comment in the discussion, On ‘new/non-native’ Englishes: A gamelan. Journal of Pragmatics 24: 315–316. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2008. A cognitive linguistic approach to the cultures of World Englishes: The emergence of a new model. In: Kristiansen, Gitte and Rene´ Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 353–385. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen. 2009. World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Vakunta, Peter Wuteh. 2008. Mujanga Tok: Poems in Pidgin English. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG.

Part I. Cameroon English: Properties and frameworks

Signboard in front of a private home in Bamenda, Cameroon (Photo: Phil Chapman)

Chapter 2 The expression of modality in Cameroon English Daniel A. Nkemleke 1. Introduction This chapter explores the general category of modality as it is expressed by central modals (will, can, may, shall, would, could, might, should, must), modal lexical expressions (e.g. I hope, I think, I suppose), epistemic adverbials (e.g. certainly, probably, perhaps) and adjectives (e.g. certain, sure, probable) in Cameroon English (CamE). The survey is undertaken within the context of remarks made by two prominent scholars on varieties of English in relation to grammar. First, ‘‘English grammar is most homogeneous throughout the world [and] di¤erences between varieties normally relate to frequency and stylistic values rather than the categorical presence or absence of individual features’’ (Go¨rlach 1991: 25, cf. Greenbaum 1988). Second, ‘‘the problem with varieties [from a grammatical perspective] is that they are inherently unstable, ranged along a qualitative cline, with each speaker seeking to move to a point where the varietal characteristics reach vanishing point, and where thus, ironically, each variety is best manifest in those who by common sense measures speak it worst’’ (Quirk 1995: 24). The above-mentioned views raise two questions, whose answers are central to the methodology of this study. Firstly, how can we track down grammatical variations (modality in our context) within any community of users and attribute them to particular groups and/or text type, since such variations are likely to be observed in other Englishes? Secondly, how can we measure the consistency of those grammatical features within a community of users? And to which discourse domains within that community can the grammatical features be attributed? A promising methodological approach to address these issues is the corpus-based approach and its quantitative and qualitative analytical techniques (cf. Schmied 1993, Biber et al. 1998). Such an empirically-based methodology is adopted in this study. Previous studies on modals and related expressions of modality have adopted a number of perspectives, ranging from an exploration of their semantic theory (e.g. Boyd and Thorne 1969, Halliday 1970, Marino

30

Daniel A. Nkemleke

1973) to a description of their grammars (e.g. Hermere´n 1978, Palmer 1979, Huddleston and Pullum 2008) and more recent frequency oriented corpus-based studies on national varieties (e.g. Coates 1983, Katikar 1984, Collins 1988, 1991, Nkemleke 2003, Smith 2003, Leech 2003). It has also become fashionable within the corpus linguistics tradition to investigate modals across national varieties of English, owing to the facility of the electronic computer corpus which has made such comparison easier (e.g. Coates and Leech 1980, Krogvig and Johansson 1981). Perhaps the most recent corpus-based accounts of modals across national varieties of English are Biber et al. (1999 Chap. 6) and Collins (2009a, 2009b). Biber and colleagues compare modal/semi-modal frequencies based on mega corpora of British and American English spoken and written texts. The study is probably one of the most extensive descriptions of modals using many registers (conversation, fiction, news, academic texts) in two L1 varieties. Collins (esp. 2009b) compares the frequency and distribution of modals/semimodals in nine corpora representing British, American, Australian, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, Hong Kong, Indian and Kenyan English. While there is no space here to go into the details of results obtained in these studies, we can summarise that they focus on the extent to which a particular modal/semi-modal form x occurs more or less frequently than the modal/semi-modal form y; and in which context (formal/informal), medium (spoken/written), variety (e.g. British or American) and text type (e.g. fiction vs. academic texts), as well as variation in such occurrences over time (see Smith 2003, Leech 2003). Most important in these recent surveys is the consensus that there seems to be a rise in the popularity of the semi-modals, and a decline in the central modals; changes which Leech (2007) has attributed tentatively to colloquialisation, grammaticalisation and Americanisation. Corpus-based studies of modals and semi-modals across varieties of English have therefore been extensively documented, with more emphasis on L1 settings. Similar studies in L2 contexts are generally lacking. This present investigation is therefore a contribution in this respect. The study is structured as follows: Section 2 is a brief description of the data, the corpus of Cameroon English (CCE). This is followed by a short account of the concept of modality and the epistemic/root dichotomy in Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to the analysis of data, i.e. a frequency profile of the modal forms, including a semantic analysis. Section 5 summarises and concludes the study.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

31

2. Data The data presented and discussed in this chapter are taken from the CCE. The corpus was compiled between 1992 and 1994, and comprises texts written between 1990 and 1994. In earlier studies (e.g. Nkemleke 2003, 2004a, 2004b) the database is reported as comprising a million words. However, this figure has been reduced to 820,554 in 2007 due to technical di‰culties in processing a large section of some of the files in a number of text categories of the corpus. The actual number of words according to text categories of the corpus is presented in Table 1. Table 1. Number of texts and words per text category in the CCE Text type

No. of texts

No. of words

A

O‰cial Press (OP)

257

126,539

B

Private Press (PP)

43

49,098

C

Novels and Short Stories (NS)

21

77,096

D

Religion (RE)

96

96,380

E

Tourism (TR)

5

26,881

F

O‰cial Letters (OL)

77

12,285

G

Private Letters (PL)

250

79,386

H

Students’ Essays (SE)

83

137,399

I

Government Memoranda (GM)

17

71,368

J

Advertisement (AD)

9

4,875

K

Miscellaneous (MI)

22

139,247

880

820,554

Total

From this database, citations of the modal forms under investigation were extracted using a KWIC (key-words-in-context) concordance software package. For the purpose of validating claims made on the use of modality features in this study, CamE data is consistently compared with British English (BrE) data (taken from several sources, including the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen (LOB) corpus) in analogous contexts. Where comparison is made in this study between modal forms from the CCE and

32

Daniel A. Nkemleke

LOB corpus, certain aspects of non-comparability between the two corpora are taken into consideration. The first is that the text components of the two corpora are not identical, although it may be concluded that the two reflect a broad view of the language in each setting. Furthermore, there is a chronological gap between the two corpora: while the CCE was compiled between 1992 and 1994, the LOB corpus was compiled about three decades before, i.e., in 1961.

3. Concept of modality Modality is a broad term used to designate the kind of meaning characteristically expressed by modal verbs, though it is not limited to them. In fact, modal notions are pervasive in the meaning of a wide range of expressions in English including the grammatical category of tense and the lexical semantics of particular words such as adverbials (e.g. probably, necessarily) and adjectives (e.g. probable, certain). The best known modalities are the alethic1 modalities of possibility and necessity; the two central notions in traditional modal logic (see Lyons 1977). Possibility and necessity are related in terms of negation: If p is necessarily true, then its negation, Pp, cannot possibly be true; and if p is possibly true, then its negation is not necessarily true. These relationships can be expressed in terms of an intensional system with two modal operators as follows: nec p C Pposs Pp poss p C Pnec Pp In this interpretation, Lyons (1977: 787) concludes that ‘‘either necessity or possibility is therefore eliminable in favour of the other under a double application of negation: once to the modal operator and once to the unmodalised constituent proposition’’. In sections 3.1 and 3.2, two kinds of

1. Alethic modalities relate to the notion of truth itself: ‘it is necessarily true or false that p’; ‘it is actually true or false that p’; ‘it is possibly true or false that p’ (see Rescher 1968: 24¤; Perkins 1983). Other modalities include epistemic modalities (relating to knowledge and belief ); temporal modalities (relating to time); boulomaic modalities (relating to desire); deontic modalities (relating to duties); evaluative modalities (e.g. ‘it is a good thing that p’); likelihood modalities (e.g. ‘it is likely that p’) and causal modalities (e.g. ‘the existing state of a¤airs will bring it about that p’).

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

33

possibility and necessity known as epistemic and root modality are briefly explained. 3.1. Epistemic modality Epistemic modality (Greek, episte#me#, i.e. knowledge) is concerned with the speaker’s assumption or assessment of possibilities and in most cases it indicates the speaker’s confidence (or lack of confidence) in the truth of the proposition expressed. The modals relating to assumption include must, should, and ought; those relating to an assessment of possibilities include may, might, could and will. To illustrate epistemic modality, let us consider the example of epistemic must in Paul must be in Kumba by now. This might have the force (in context) of: ‘I assume, taking into account what time he left home, the time now, and the state of public transport, that Paul is in Kumba’. This interpretation makes explicit the fact that epistemic must involves the speaker in logical inference, even though the facts which lead to the inference are often not stated. Epistemic must can then be seen as one way of expressing the logical statement: ‘if P then Q’, that is, the sentence above could be rewritten: ‘If Paul left home at 8 o’clock, and if the buses are running normally, and if it is 9 o’clock, then by now Paul is in Kumba’. A logician’s, as opposed to a linguist’s, view of epistemic modality would lead to a paraphrase such as: ‘In the light of what is known, it is necessarily the case that Paul is in Kumba’. Note that the speaker/writer is not mentioned; that is, logicians are primarily concerned with objective epistemic modality which is clearly related to alethic modality (the modality of the necessary truth of propositions). While objective epistemic modality does occur in natural language, it is not very common, and this has been recognised by linguists whose definitions have emphasised the subjectivity of epistemic modality. That is, the example above would most commonly be interpreted as meaning that the writer was confident about what s/he was saying. In other words, a linguist’s definition might be ‘I’m sure/I confidently assume that Paul is now in Kumba’. In their most common subjective interpretation, all epistemic modals can roughly be placed at two ends of a scale whose extremes represent confidence and doubt as shown in Figure 1 (from Coates 1983: 19).

34

Daniel A. Nkemleke

Figure 1. The epistemic modals

A diagram to show the negative forms in relation to these scales is not the inverse of this, but is identical (Figure 2). Since it is the main predication and not the modal predication that is negated for epistemic modality, the speaker’s confidence (or lack of it) in the truth of the proposition expressed in the main predication is una¤ected. Here, can which in its positive form is never epistemic, supplies the missing negative for must (must not is used only for non-epistemic meaning). In these cases, modal logic can illuminate the workings of ordinary language by demonstrating the relationship between possibility and necessity. These two logical concepts can be expressed as the inverse of each other

Figure 2. The epistemic modals negated

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

35

thus, nec P C Pposs PP (that is, ‘it is necessarily the case that P’ is equivalent to ‘it is not possible that not P’) and conversely poss P C Pnec PP (that is, ‘it is possible that P’ is equivalent to ‘it is not necessarily the case that not P’). These logical pairs, with their English relationships, are given below: nec p (Pposs PP) nec PP (Pposs PP) poss P (Pnec PP) poss PP (Pnec P)

Paul must be in Kumba Paul can’t be in Kumba Paul may be in Kumba Paul may not be in Kumba

Must is the epistemic modal of necessity while may is the epistemic modal of possibility. But since mustn’t (¼nec PP) is unavailable, can’t (¼ PPoss P) is used instead. This, and other peculiarities of epistemic modality in English, has led Lyons (1977: 802) to conclude that ‘‘in English at least, possibility, rather than necessity, should be taken as primitive in the analysis of epistemic modality’’. Occasionally, there are cases of objective epistemic modality in English (Coates 1983), but most often the overwhelming number of the cases are unambiguously subjective. There is therefore very little indeterminacy in the epistemic category. This means that there is a gradient from subjective (the core) to objective (the periphery) with few examples at the periphery. Moreover, the following characteristics will show that as a category the epistemic modal is relatively distinct. For each modal with epistemic meaning, it is possible to give a comprehensive definition such as ‘epistemic modality expresses the speaker’s reservation about asserting the truth of the proposition’. It is also possible to show that certain grammatical features are associated with the epistemic modals: for example, negation a¤ects the proposition and not the modality (except in cases of suppletive can’t, see above). There are no past tense forms (except occasionally might, for may in reported speech); as with negation, the occurrence of HAVE þ EN a¤ects the proposition, not the modality (thus, Paul must have been in Yaounde means ‘I confidently infer (present) that Paul was in Yaounde’ (Past); and the co-occurrence of the epistemic modals and certain syntactic forms such as HAVE þ EN, BE þ ING, distinguishes this category of modality from non-epistemic.

36

Daniel A. Nkemleke

3.2. Root modality Root modality (Greek, deontos P deontic, i.e. of that which is binding) relates to the modality of obligation and may include commissives (e.g. promises, threats), directives (e.g. requests, commands, instructions) and volatives (e.g. desires, wishes, fears). Because root modality encompasses diverse meanings, it is often more di‰cult to characterise. Thus, a typical root modal such as must covers a range of meanings of which ‘obligation’ represents only the core. Palmer (1979) has attempted to simplify root modality by recognising not just (root) deontic modality, but also dynamic and existential modalities. However, as Coates (1983) observes, this distinction fails to take into consideration the fact that all the meanings of root must are related and can be shown to lie on a cline extending from strong obligation (the core) to cases at the periphery where the sense of obligation is extremely weak (i.e. where a more appropriate paraphrase would be ‘it is important that. . .’). In certain contexts where authority structure is well-defined, such as when a mother speaks to a child, or a teacher to a pupil, a ‘deontic’ (Palmer 1979) or ‘discourse-oriented’ (Palmer 1987) interpretation is more appropriate, and in other contexts, such as formal prose, where participants are less clearly defined, such an interpretation would be less appropriate. But there is equally a clear basic meaning which is common to both – something like ‘it is necessary’. Thus, ‘You must get out of the bath now’ (mother to child) means ‘it is necessary for you to get out of the bath and I am going to see that you do’, while ‘clay pots . . . must have some protection from severe weather’ means ‘it is necessarily the case that clay pots have some protection. . .’ with the speaker/writer’s involvement being less prominent (both examples are quoted in Coates 1983: 34–5). Gradience seems, therefore, to be an essential feature of root modality. While epistemic modals vary only in terms of subjectivity (with objective cases occurring less frequently), root modals vary both in terms of subjectivity and in terms of strong-weak continuum. Despite the range of meaning covered by the root modals, their essential unity is confirmed by the syntactic patterns associated with them, which distinguish them from their epistemic counterparts. The following features are associated with root modals: animate subjects, agentive verbs and passive voice. In spoken language, stress and intonation patterns may also distinguish a root meaning from an epistemic meaning. The distinction between epistemic and root (deontic) modality is relevant in the analysis of most natural languages,

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

37

including English (Sweetser 1982), and such a distinction is upheld in this present analysis.2

4. Discussion 4.1. Frequency distribution of central modals Table 2 presents the gross frequency of central modals in the CCE. The figures for the LOB corpus are taken from Coates and Leech (1980: 26); and are included here for comparison. On the basis of the raw figures here, certain general trends on frequency of the central modals in CamE are apparent. First and foremost is the evidence that the tentative forms (would, should, could, might), taken together, are generally less frequent, compared to the primary forms (will, Table 2. Gross frequency of central modals in the CCE and LOB corpus Modal

CCE

LOB

will

3,250

2,804

can

2,035

2,141

may

1,366

1,323

shall

413

352

would

1,854

3,002

could

918

1,744

might

202

775

should

1,537

1,285

must

1,368

1,131

Total

12,943

14,557

2. Although this analytical framework is based on the root/epistemic distinction of modality (derived from the logical opposition of necessity vs. possibility), the view of modality taken in this study is not necessarily restricted to this dichotomy. Hence, the lexical expressions of modality (in Section 4.5) belong to a di¤erent set of opposition, namely subjectivity vs. objectivity, which is generally not taken to refer to epistemic meaning (cf. Heltoft 2005).

38

Daniel A. Nkemleke

shall, can, may). For example, the tentative forms occur 4,511 times and the primary forms occur 7,064 times, making a di¤erential frequency value of 2,554. In contrast, the figures for the LOB corpus are 6,806 vs. 6,620 respectively, making a di¤erential gap of 186 for BrE. Further, taking each modal separately, the di¤erential gap between its primary and tentative form in the CCE appears to be marked vis-a`-vis BrE (Table 3). Table 3. Frequency di¤erences of will/would, can/could, may/might, and shall/ should in the CCE and LOB corpus Modal pairs

Quantitative di¤erence & percentages between modal pairs CCE

LOB

will/would

will is 1,396 times more frequent than would

would is 198 times more frequent than will

can/could

can is 1,117 times more frequent than could

can is 397 times more frequent than could

may/might

may is 1,164 times more frequent than might

may is 584 times more frequent than might

shall/should

should is 1,124 times more frequent than shall

should is 933 times more frequent than shall

The obvious interpretation here is that those meanings associated with ‘past’ forms of modals such as expressing hypothesis and tentativeness are likely to be less frequently expressed. The di¤erential gap between will/would (where will overwhelmingly surpasses would in frequency by a margin of 1,396) in the Cameroon material is far greater than it is the case in LOB, and suggests perhaps that in CamE the tentative and more polite form (would ) tend to be less frequently expressed. The can/could pair further testifies to a similar tendency,3 where can is 1,117 times more frequent than could, compared to 397 times in the British material. In fact, there is more or less a levelling of these two forms in the LOB corpus, which probably is an indication of a more balanced occurrence of the two forms in BrE. The specialisation argument is further accentuated in the may/might pair, where the former exceeds the latter by a statistically wide margin (1,164), twice as much as in the LOB corpus. The shall/should pair represents another interesting contrast in the 3. Nkemleke (2003) refers to this as ‘specialisation’ and/or ‘restriction’ in modal usage.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

39

CCE. For one thing, it is the only pair in which the two forms exceed the LOB figures. The CamE preference for should seems to be due to the lower frequency of alternative forms of the expressions epistemic/root necessity and/or obligation meaning, such as the use of have to.4 This is yet another indication that modal usage seems to be generally tilted to one semantic function or the other in CamE. The raw figures in Table 3 above do not specify in which respect and domain distinctive features of modality in CamE may be established. It is, therefore, necessary to focus on the distribution of these modal forms across discourse domains. These details are presented in Table 4 (cf. Figure 3). Modals occur most frequently in MI and RE texts in CamE. In terms of frequency counts, should, for example, is an interesting case of variation between Cameroon and BrE, where its frequency is higher in RE. In Table 4. Frequency of central modals across text types in the CCE5 Types/ OP Modals

SE

MI

RE

NS PP GM

PL

TR OL AD Total

will

359

282

634

744

96 166

381

491

26

43 28

3,250

can

180

443

536

274

69 104

105

265

29

11 19

2,035

may

156

105

405

301

40

85

103

102

28

38

3

1,366

shall

26

34

135

86

21

14

24

44

17

12

–

413

would

131

302

265

446 303 118

34

231

5

16

3

1,854

could

95

127

179

123 179

62

18

113

10

10

2

918

might

12

20

19

62

18

6

38

1

1

–

202

should

164

143

320

305

79 108

194

172

14

35

3

1,537

96

55

502

303

69

168

89

13

–

1

1,368

1,219 1,511 2,995 2,644 881 747 1,033 1,545 143 166 59

12,943

must Total

25

72

4. Have to is a semi-modal and falls outside the scope of this study. However, Coates (1983) provides a frequency of 699 from the LOB corpus. The corresponding figure from the CCE is 266 (see Nkemleke 2003). 5. Since this is not an overtly comparative study of CCE and LOB, and because LOB categories are not identical with the CCE, I have used absolute frequencies here.

40

Daniel A. Nkemleke

Krogvig and Johansson’s (1981: 34–35) survey of modals, should occurs frequently in all other text categories but not category D (Religion). In contrast, with a frequency of 305, should is the most frequent modal in the RE (Religion) text category in CamE. Our initial specialisation hypothesis may also apply in this case, as evident in the overall frequency of the modals in specific text types shown above. For example, will appears to be the only modal with a relatively even distribution across text types, if we consider TR, OL and AD as modally impoverished text categories in Cameroon written discourse. In addition, even this distribution is skewed, with a very high concentration in RE, MI and PL in that order. Surprisingly, though, is the case of students’ essays6 (SE) and the two press categories (OP and PP), where one would normally expect a high concentration of modals, especially those expressing tentativeness (would, should,7 could, might). In these instances, the tentative forms are consistently less frequent compared to the ‘‘present tense’’ forms (will, shall, can, may). Can seems to be equally very popular, especially in the MI, SE, PL and RE categories. This high frequency of can is due to its frequent use in the ability sense (cf. Figure 3 below). The form would is equally very frequent, especially, in RE and SE texts. However, one observable feature in the use of this modal is the apparent uncertainty on the part of the writer as to which form to choose (will or would ) as illustrated in (1)–(4). (1) He knows that through Johnson he would be able to get slaves from the villagers. (CCE/SE.txt). (2) . . . twenty each year. In six years there would be 120 disciples in the church. . . (CCE/RE.txt). (3) . . . saying that if the violence continues, Kenya would be punged [sic] in choas like Somalia (CCE/OP.txt). (4) I will give you the money if I knew that it can be properly used (CCE/PL.txt). In Standard (British) English, examples (1)–(3) require will and example (4) requires would. Although such cases are not statistically very high in 6. Perkins (1983: 87) states that modality is fundamentally a relationship between a set of circumstances and a proposition/event relative to a certain set of laws, and that if we are to reflect on and discuss such a relationship, it must be given some semblance of objectivity. Consequently, modal nominal expressions represent the ultimate stage in the objectification of modality, namely it nominalization. 7. In fact, in Biber et al. (1999: 852) for example, should occurs up to 68% in academic prose and about 46% in news.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

41

the overall corpus, the fact that they occur at least in many text categories, including the o‰cial press where seasoned journalists contribute articles, testifies to their existence in CamE (cf. Simo Bobda 2002). 4.2. The semantic of central modals A general appraisal of some of the basic semantic functions of modals in CamE requires that a formal distribution of the forms as seen above be complemented by a functional representation. This section, therefore, focuses on the two main distinctions of modal meaning, namely epistemic/root functions (with a notable exception of can8); and highlights the apparent dominance of the latter function over the former. The quasisubjunctive character of should is further discussed. However, it is important to indicate that only a cursory analysis is intended here. The modals lend themselves to several other subtle shades of meanings which for want of space cannot all be accounted for in this study. An impressionistic view of the various semantic distributions of these central modals is presented in Figure 3 (based on Nkemleke 2003).

Figure 3. Basic senses of central modals in the CCE and LOB compared 8. Can is usually discussed under three main headings: ‘ability’, ‘permission’ and ‘possibility’ (cf. Leech 1971, Hermere´n 1978), since its epistemic status is controversial (Hoye 1997) and Coates (1983) argues that it is the only modal where the epistemic/root distinction does not apply.

42

Daniel A. Nkemleke

4.2.1. Must Epistemic must conveys the speaker’s confidence in the truth of what s/he is saying, based on a logical process of deduction from facts known to the person (which may or may not be specified). Root meaning ranges from cases which can be paraphrased ‘it is imperative/obligatory’ to cases where the paraphrase ‘it is important’ is more appropriate. Despite this range of meaning, a basic meaning can be identified which is common throughout, roughly ‘it is necessary for’. To discuss these facets of meanings, Table 5 presents a further breakdown of the frequency of epistemic/root must into instruction, exhortation, intention, necessity, and logical certainty/necessity in the CCE. Table 5. Breakdown of epistemic/root must in the CCE Root Instruction

Exhortation

Intention

Necessity

22

31

25

50

Epistemic

Total

Logical certainty/ necessity 41

169

The examples of must as instruction (22 tokens) share one important characteristic, namely that of the writer’s involvement in the proposition. Palmer (1979) calls this discourse orientation while Lyons (1977) considers it in terms of subjectivity. The meaning of must comes close to that of an imperative, paraphrasable as ‘I order you to x’, as in (5)–(9). These cases are typical of the core referred to as strong obligation by some linguists (see Sweetser 1982). (5) . . . needs to carry out restitution. You must act at once or face the consequences (CCE/RE.txt). (6) . . . anything to Massa Kurt. You must come and see me (CCE/NS.txt). (7) . . . safety and treating physician. You must declare to the National Social Insurance Fund (CCE/MI.txt). (8) . . . first year in secondary school, you must do your assignments, revision exercise every evening (CCE/PL.txt). (9) . . . and employment opportunities. You must find this out yourself. Draw up a plan of study (CCE/MI.txt). Examples (5)–(9) correspond to the (BrE) native speaker’s psychological stereotype of root must (cf. Wells 1979) because they have the following

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

43

features: (i) the subject is animate; (ii) the main verb is activity verb; (iii) the writer is interested in getting subject to perform the action; and (iv) in most of the cases it could be inferred that the writer is in a position (socially or legally) to state an obligation in which the subject is expected to comply with. In other words, must in the above examples is essentially performative. Such examples are usually rare in ordinary day-to-day communication as statistically confirmed by Coates (1983) for BrE, where they constitute only 1 out of 14 of all root examples in the LOB corpus. Furthermore, performative root must occurs in the LOB material mostly in contexts where there is a clear universally-acknowledged authority structure (e.g. the home: mother to child; or the school: teacher to pupil, etc.). Since, as Coates (1983) observes, performative root must (apart from a few rare contexts like the law courts) is rare in BrE because people are either seen as equals or are treated as such. Must is also generally used in CamE for self-exhortation (10)–(13) and to express intention (14)–(18). In the former case, the writer urges himself and another person(s) to do something. Examples for self-exhortation in the corpus occur with the impersonal pronoun ‘we’ (10)–(11) and ‘one’ (12)–(13). (10) . . . such a new policy. It may sound ambitious, so be it; we must accept that for the progress of our society (CCE/MI.txt). (11) But we must admit that to study and preserve over 200 di¤erent languages (CCE/MI.txt). (12) . . . the specific cause of an event or situation, then one must accept that it is in the nature of creation that it should (CCE/MI.txt). (13) . . . sector, to insure and encourage them to work harder. One must also think of the rapidly achieved diversification of Cameroon’s (CCE/MI.txt). Examples of this nature are typically frequent in lectures, sermons and other forms of oratory in BrE (Coates 1983). In CamE, they do not seem to be restricted to any text category. The other prominent function of must involves expressing an intention as in (14)–(18). (14) . . . thank God he has asked to be baptised. I must baptise him quickly before he thinks of something else (CCE/RE.txt). (15) . . . five months without receiving my pension. This is why I must come to Yaounde´. Coming here is an ordeal because we spend (CCE/PP.txt).

44

Daniel A. Nkemleke

(16) Perhaps that was his opinion on the subject. But I must assure you that the Nigerian system of federalism has not (CCE/OP.txt). (17) This is my best time I am talking like this. I must say she spoil me for those few days. The first day I got there (CCE/PL.txt). (18) . . . in the process of taking pictures of these ‘gems’’. I must add too those warts or no warts, (PN Yaounde´) continues (CCE/MI.txt). Apart from (14) and (15) which express an intention yet to be accomplished, examples (16)–(18) are used holophrastically (Huddleston 1984), i.e., the writer is seen to be performing what s/he is in the act of urging him/herself to do. For example, ‘I must say’ means ‘I say’, ‘I must add’ means ‘I add’ in (17) and [18] respectively. These examples constitute 75% of all occurrences of must expressing intention in the CCE. Although it is also fairly frequent in BrE, it occurs only in the SEU (spoken data), especially in the category of private spoken language (Coates 1983: 36). It is equally interesting that the types of verbs that co-occur with must in this context in CamE (CCE) contrast with those in BrE (LOB). In the latter, the modal occurs with a limited set of verbs such as say, admit, confess, and warn; with I must say occurring most frequently. In the former, apart from I must say, which occurs once in the corpus, must occurs with a set of verbs completely di¤erent from that in BrE. The following are the various forms of must used holophrastically in the CCE (frequency figures are given in parentheses): I must say. . . (1), I must add. . . (5), I must assure. . . (3), I must keep. . . (3), I must end. . . (3), I must hit. . . (1), I must congratulate. . . (1), I must be ashamed. . . (1), I must furnish. . . (1) and I must do. . . (1). Necessity (root and epistemic) is also an important meaning expressed by must. About 45.5% (i.e., 91 out of 200) of the occurrences of must in the CCE are used to state that something is necessary or that it is a necessity. There are two ways in which this is expressed: first, that something is a necessity in an unavoidable sense and must be the case – paraphrasable as ‘it is imperative/it is important. . .’, – and second, that something is logically the case; in this sense, the necessity is logical – expressing the writer’s confidence in the truth of what s/he is writing or saying based on a logical process of deduction from facts known to him/her (which may, or may not be specified ). In the first case must is root, and in the second case it is epistemic. (19) The one who renounces all that he must ask the Lord to supply his needs and not his wants and luxuries (CCE/RE.txt).

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

45

(20) . . . an absentee landlord. The treasurer of a football club must as a duty take instructions only from the President General (CCE/OP.txt). (21) The Cameroon civil servant to serve the nation well he must be both independent and impartial and on the other hand (CCE/MI.txt). (22) I received your letter which you send [sic] through male [sic] 2. I know you must be very worried for what is going on between us (CCE/PL.txt). (23) . . . after a few minutes he said: something unpleasant certainly must have happened, and he suspected that (CCE/NS.txt). (24) . . . turning his back to him. Ah: it must have been at this moment that Satan deceives them (CCE/PP.txt). Examples (19)–(21) illustrate root must. Here, the writer is not directly involved, but s/he states an obligation. Examples (22)–(24) are epistemic. In (22) and (23) the writer’s confidence is overtly expressed (and includes the harmonic phrase I know and the harmonic word certainly) and the reasons for this confidence are implicit. Example (24) is an objective case meaning: ‘in the light of what is known, it is necessarily the case that x’. The LOB corpus has very few examples of this type and Coates (1983: 42) observes that ‘‘they are unusual in normal everyday language’’. However, in the CCE 39% (i.e. 16 of 41) of the epistemic examples of must are of this type. 4.2.2. Should The epistemic/root distinction of should has already been illustrated in 3.1 above, and as Figure 4 indicates, root senses are by far the most frequent in CamE, accounting for 70% of the sample figure. This leads us to the logical conclusion that root senses are more common. Epistemic senses tend to be common in BrE. Should is also used in the CCE to state a command or a wish. This occurs in subordinate ‘that-clauses’, and has traditionally been referred to as quasi-subjunctive (Quirk et al. 1985). The subjunctive in English is one of the moods that a verb can take. In contrast to the indicative and the imperative moods, the subjunctive is usually used to express wishes, hopes, and doubts. The relative frequency of should in the context of ‘thatclauses’ in the CCE is very close to that of the LOB corpus. The two corpora therefore do not exhibit any significant di¤erences here. However, the disparity lies elsewhere, namely in the word range that immediately precedes ‘that-clauses’ in the context of should. Table 6 specifies the di¤erent word classes that occur in the left context of ‘that-clauses’ in the two samples (frequencies are given in parentheses).

46

Daniel A. Nkemleke

Table 6. Word classes preceding ‘that-clauses’ in the context of should in the CCE and LOB corpus Word class

CCE (26 tokens)

LOB (38 tokens)

nouns

home (1) honour (1) importance (1) problems (1) night (1) dignity (1) [name] (1) centre province (1) a site (1)

basis (1) condition (1) danger (1) determination (1) idea (2) notion (1) wish (1) suggestion (2)

verbs

stated (2) said (1) accepted (1) advised (1) wanted (1) recommended (2) received (1) thinking (1) require (1) praying (1) pray (1) noted (1) wish (1)

decide (3) ask (2) agree (1) think (1)

adjectives

obvious (1)

necessary (4) natural (2) appropriate (2) sat (1) wrong (1) amazed (3) fitting (1) shameful (1) funny (1) undesirable (2) keen (1) legitimate (2)

These figures reveal interesting contrasts between Cameroon and British English: while verbs most frequently precede ‘that-clauses’ in the context of should in CamE, adjectives are the most frequent in the same context in BrE. Further, only one adjective occurs in this context in CamE, but up to twelve (occurring 21 times) occur in the LOB corpus. Worthy of note also is the di¤erence in the choice of words preceding should in the CCE and LOB corpora. Again, the LOB corpus comprises modal nominal words (see Perkins 1983: 87, also note 5), which refer to more epistemic states (e.g. condition, notion, suggestion, danger and idea) than to deontic states (e.g. determination and wish). The Cameroonian material has no modal nominal words. In contrast, there are more performative verbs (i.e. deontic words referring to acts)9 in the Cameroonian material (e.g. stated, said, recommended, advise, pray, require) than in the British data (e.g. ask, decide). Moreover, on the basis of the evidence in Table 6, one might tentatively conclude that adjectives tend to occur less frequently in the context of 9. Fraser (1975) provides a fairly comprehensive list of performative verbs as follow: (1) Act of asserting (e.g. a‰rm, state); (2) Acts of evaluating (e.g. estimate, conclude); (3) Acts of stipulating (e.g. call, nominate); (4) Acts of requesting (e.g. ask, require); (5) Acts of suggesting (e.g. advise, suggest) (6) Acts of exercising authority (e.g. allow, authorise); (7) Acts of committing (e.g. promise, undertake).

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

47

‘that-clauses’ preceding should in CamE. There are as many as 12 types of adjectives with a total frequency of 21 in the British data. To the extent that these adjectives are clearly modal expressions (alethic, boulomaic and evaluative modalities, see note 1), indicating the writer’s angle of what is, or what should be, CamE appears to be restricted in this sense. 4.2.3. Can The subtle distinctions in the three main senses of can (i.e. ability, possibility, permission) can be illustrated by the following triad: ‘I can do it’: ability (inherent properties allow me to do it); ‘I can do it’: permission (human authority/rules and regulations allow me to do it); and ‘I can do it’: possibility (external circumstances allow me to do it). As it is evident in Table 2 (cf. Figure 3), can is the second most frequent modal after will in CamE – an order which appears to reflect the acquisitional priority of modality especially in learner/child language development (Perkins 1980, 1981, 1982, Fawcett and Perkins 1980). Examples (25)–(27) show can as ability in the CCE. (25) Female 1, there is nothing I can tell you except that we should put everything in prayer (CCE/PL.txt). (26) Your friendship with brother and your very behaviours, I can judge you as someone worthy of trust and worth winning my brother’s likeness (CCE/PL.txt). (27) Long time I haven’t heard from you, and as you know I can’t bear it for too long (CCE/PL.txt). These examples and many others in the corpus have the following characteristics: (i) the subject is animate and has agentive function; (ii) the verb denotes action/activity; and (iii) the possibility of the action is determined by inherent properties of the subject. The relative dominance of such ability-senses over the possibility-senses would seem to suggest the interpersonal and action-oriented character of can in CamE.10 Furthermore, can as permission is a frequent occurrence in the CCE. In contrast Coates (1983: 100) notes that in BrE can as permission occurs infrequently in all

10. The interpersonal and action-oriented use of modals is reminiscent of early language development in children. For example, in his study of the development of the English auxiliary system in a sample of 60 children between the ages of 15 and 42 months, Wells (1979) reports that 50% of the sample use can at least once in the ‘ability’ sense.

48

Daniel A. Nkemleke

kinds of texts. Similarly, as Coates adds, can as ability is only predominant in fiction texts and in informal spoken texts. Can in CamE does not appear to be restricted to any particular context. 4.2.4. Could Apart from its epistemic possibility sense as in (28), could is like can in some ways except that it is marked for tentativeness. (28) . . . for the elections, speculations are rife that the elections could be held any moment from now or early December (CCE/PP.txt). Other meanings include: a. Past of can: Root possibility (29) . . . unexpectedly, like a thunderclap, without anything which could be regarded as a warning he would be blamed for having ignored (CCE/MI.txt). b. Past of can: (Root) permission (30) Owona was an elected o‰cial and, consequently could not be fired by the minister (CCE/PP.txt). c. Past of can: ability (31) I could see that he was very frightened (CCE/PL.txt). d. Remote of can: Root possibility (32) Yet, if that was all about the story, then one could rightly say, judging the intensity of the excitement, that all that agitation was ridiculous (CCE/OP.txt). e. Remote of can: permission (33) . . . the long vacation or any one and whenever you do you could write and tell me the person (CCE/PL.txt). f. Remote of can: ability (34) . . . could give you a job in his project and at the same time you could be doing your Masters (CCE/PL.txt). Overall, non-epistemic functions of could are most frequent and this highlights its productive character in CamE. As past of can, could can be identified with permission and ability with the additional marking ‘þPast’. Examples with past meaning constitute just 42% of the CCE sample and up to 62% of the LOB sample (Coates1983: 109). This seems to suggest

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

49

that in CamE, there is a tendency to avoid complex structures with the socalled ‘past’ forms of modals. 4.2.5. May May is the main exponent of epistemic possibility in CCE. It is more frequent here than in the LOB corpus. Epistemic may expresses the writer’s lack of confidence in the truth of the proposition and can be paraphrased by ‘it is possible that’, ‘perhaps’. Fraser (1975) observes that epistemic may is characterised by subjectivity, by flexibility of time reference, and most importantly, by its use as a hedge: i.e., the writer/speaker avoids committing himself to the truth of the proposition. This observation highlights the various shades of meaning that epistemic may covers in English. However, as Table 7 shows, epistemic may in the CCE does not show as much flexibility as it does in the LOB corpus. Table 7. Shades of meaning of epistemic may in the CCE and LOB corpus Corpus

Use as a hedge

Concessive use

Pragmatic use

CCE

3

4

–

LOB

18

8

occurs but no frequency figure is given (see example (40), from Coates 1983: 136)

Epistemic may as a hedge (CCE) (35)–(37): (35) . . . Prime Minister or the President of the Republic, as the case may be, the competent ministers will sign the mission orders (CCE/OP.txt). (36) At the age of 60 (or 55 as the case may be), (Lion Retraite) will pay you, according to your choice, either a life annuity or a lump sum, which will always be greater than the amount which you have saved (CCE/MI.txt). (37) God may or may not act immediately on the ‘‘no’’ so that its e¤ects can be seen on the physical plane (CC/RE.txt). Epistemic may: concessive use (CCE) (38)–(39): (38) However alien it may appear to readers whose world view emphasises individualisation and freedom of choice, understanding the significance of respect for seniority and obedience to elders and superiors is one of the keys to decoding West African behaviour (CCE/SE.txt).

50

Daniel A. Nkemleke

(39) . . . subjects are being ignored by teachers, even though they may be on the timetables (CCE/MI.txt). Epistemic may: pragmatic use (LOB) (40): (40) . . . and a lot of people don’t want to be bothered to organise their holidays, well you may be right you may be wrong. In its use as a hedge, epistemic may shows avoidance of commitment to the factuality of the proposition. In its concessive use, the writer softens his/her own assertion and it can be paraphrased by a subordinate clause introduced by ‘(al)though’. When used in a pragmatic sense, the writer adds a disclaimer to the correctness of previous assertions (40). Other pragmatic uses of epistemic may in BrE (cf. Palmer 1979) involve stereotype expressions such as ‘you may wish to know’, ‘you may remember’, etc. These nuances (especially in its frequency and diversity) reflect a certain degree of flexibility of epistemic may in BrE which is not the case in CamE. It has to be noted, however, that such pragmatic uses are better attested in the spoken form of the language and this perhaps explains why Coates (1983) does not provide frequency figures. 4.2.6. Might An important function of might is that it expresses the modality of subjective epistemic possibility and can be paraphrased by ‘it is possible that’ or by adverbs such as ‘perhaps’, ‘maybe’. This function, however, is far less expressed in CamE. In addition, epistemic might has a relatively restricted semantic scope. In other words, the range of time reference available to epistemic might is restricted, and it is not frequently used as a hedge – a feature that is common in BrE (Coates 1983). Examples (41) and (42) illustrate the use of might as an epistemic modal in the CCE. In both, the proposition refers to the moment of writing, paraphrasable as ‘it’s possible that’. (41) . . . if the letter is not send [sic] through the right person the letter might get missing somewhere (CCE/PL.txt). (42) Whatever the case might be, there is certainly more space needed to accommodate the remaining (CCE/MI.txt). 4.2.7. Will Four functions are associated with will: prediction, predictability, willingness, and intention. The first two correspond to epistemic meaning and are

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

51

less frequent in CamE. Prediction can be paraphrased ‘I predict that’ and the main predication always has future time reference as in (43)–(44).11 (43) I am sure I will see you since I will be passing through (PN Yaounde´) (CCE/PL.txt). (44) I am confident that we will have to go in for the second chance (CCE/OP.txt). Predictability usually expresses the writer’s confidence in the truth of the proposition; but unlike epistemic must, the writer’s confidence is not based on a process of logical inference. Instead, it is based on common sense or on repeated experience and therefore relates to the habitual in a way that must does not, (45)–(46). (45) . . . peoples of duties/tasty. A) Head teacher’s duties: One will expect the reference document to provide the following information about (CCE/GM.txt). (46) . . . manage the forest in such a manner. The research centre will help the international community in forest management (CCE/ OP.txt). Willingness and intention correspond to root meaning. Both can involve a modal predication discussing a state (either the subject’s willingness, or his/her intention) and both can involve a main predication which refers to a single future event (i.e. which has dynamic aspect). The di¤erence between the two meanings is one of focus (Coates and Leech 1980), with examples of willingness focussing on the modal predication, i.e., on the subject’s state of mind, (47): (47) . . . clear before I proceed I will like to tell you one thing (CCE/ PL.txt). Examples involving intention focus on the main predication, i.e., some future event (48). (48) . . . discomfort at getting at the truth. We will pursue this case without fear when the time comes (CCE/OP.txt). However, willingness seems to be salient to both meanings, since intending to do something presupposes willingness to do it. 11. In some cases especially in BrE, will (as prediction) is a little more than a marker of future tense (e.g. ‘it will be lovely to see you’ (Coates 1983)). In other cases, it may be tinged with uncertainty.

52

Daniel A. Nkemleke

4.2.8. Would Would functions as both the past tense form of will and as a general hypothetical marker: The latter function is by far the more recurrent, accounting for 31.1% of the CCE sample. In its typical hypothetical sense, would generally marks unreal conditions when the corresponding real condition would have a simple past tense (Coates 1983). In other words as Palmer (1979: 139) notes, the events in the main clause of a conditional sentence are not necessarily subsequent to those of the subordinate clause as in (49)–(50). (49) He said that they would only take her away over her dead body. If it is a curse I would accept it at least for her sake (CCE/PL.txt). (50) If you had sent ‘‘errow’’ without ‘water-leaf ’ it would have been a waste of time (CCE/PL.txt). The main di¤erence between real and unreal conditions is that the latter bears a clear negative implication. In other words, the implication of (49) is that it is not a curse so the writer has not accepted it, in (50) the ‘‘errow’’ has not been sent without ‘water-leaf ’ so it is not a waste. Leech (1971: 112) and Hermere´n (1978: 137) acknowledge that this negative implication is the chief characteristic of hypothetical would. Seen in the light of the evidence from the LOB corpus, hypothetical would, like the epistemic meanings of most modals, is less frequent in CamE. 4.3. Frequency distribution of epistemic adverbials The claim that epistemic senses of modals appear to be less frequently expressed in CamE is further strengthened by the relatively low frequency of epistemic adverbials12 in the CCE (Table 8), compared with LOB figures in brackets. Since epistemic adverbials, like epistemic modality, have the primary function of commenting on the content of the proposition expressed, the writer who uses such forms is involved in the same mental process of deduction and judgment about the certainty, reliability, and limitations of such propositions. In comparative terms and as Table 8 shows, epistemic adverbials are not as frequent in Cameroonian written texts, as they are in BrE texts. Further evidence of this can be found in Hyland’s (1998: 134¤.)

12. The choice of these adverbials is based on the inventory in Biber et al. (1999: 854–856), which is by no means an exhaustive list (see Greenbaum 1969).

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

53

Table 8. Epistemic adverbials in the CCE Texts/ Epistemic Adverbials

OP SE MI RE NS PP GM PL TR OL AD Total

certainly

9

3

26

13

12

3

6

5

1

–

–

78 (235)

undoubtedly

–

–

1

–

1

–

4

–

–

–

–

6 (46)

probably

8

8

14

3

9

2

4

7

–

–

–

55 (274)

perhaps maybe

12 2

5 –

30 –

10 16

23 3

4 –

2 –

2 –

1 –

1 –

– –

90 (379) 21 (83)

possibly

–

–

11

4

1

3

–

1

–

–

–

20 (92)

surely

5

1

9

4

5

2

–

10

–

–

–

36 (123)

in fact

23

27

22

8

25

4

18

31

6

2

–

166 (211)

really

12

43

32

15

35 10

4

146

2

1

–

300 (309)

8

43

29

14

10

3

1

27

2

–

–

137 (309)

actually evidently

2

–

3

–

3

–

–

–

1

–

–

9 (30)

apparently

13

–

2

2

4

5

–

3

–

–

–

29 (74)

according to in most cases

70 4

27 12

32 5

23 –

4 –

8 1

34 –

4 10 – –

– –

3 –

215 (118) 22 (10)

mainly

19

7

22

1

3

4

22

2 10

1

–

91 (86)

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

3 (9)

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

3 (3)

–

–

1

–

1

–

–

–

2 (3)

190 178 308 113 138 51

95

239 33

5

3

1,283 (2,394)

typically

1

2

in my view

2

–

in my opinion

–

–

Total

–

study based on a much smaller corpus of 75,000 words, where over 36 di¤erent forms of adverbs occur, with an overall frequency of 329.13 In view of the relevance of epistemic modalities in formal writing, text types such as SE, OP and PP seem to be the most appropriate discourse domains where writers’ modal responsibility is important and ought to be highly valued. For example, expressing doubt and (un)certainty about 13. While this reference is made, it has to be noted that Hyland’s (1998: 96) corpus is based on di¤erent text types, namely research articles in the field of cell and molecular biology. The articles were written principally by scholars from Britain and the United States.

54

Daniel A. Nkemleke

propositions (certainly, probably, perhaps, maybe, etc.); commenting on the status of propositions as real-life facts (in fact, really, actually, etc.); evaluating the source of information (evidently, apparently, etc.); marking limitation of propositions (mainly, in most cases, typically, etc.); and indicating the perspective or terms of reference from which the proposition is true (in my view, in my opinion, etc.) are the major characteristics of texts in these categories. While SE and OP seem to have many epistemic adverbials, PP has one of the lowest figures, yet it is the same press category as OP. Two possible explanations may account for this. First, the political problems that Cameroon went through in the early 1990s gave rise to journalistic amateurism with the creation of a number of private newspapers. These journalists were often trained on the job and it may be concluded that they had not had enough experience in writing. Second, there was a general tendency by the opposition and private press to see things in black and white terms and probably found no need to modalize propositions. Whatever reasons one may advance, the two contrasting cases of the use of epistemic adverbials (in the OP and PP categories) seem to illustrate the relationship between experience/world view and writing habits. Since the early 1990s, not much seems to have changed in Cameroon in terms of the political di¤erences between government and opposition. This dichotomy is reflected in the editorial policies of newspapers, where the o‰cial press is government-sponsored and the private press is not. It seems to be the case that one is likely to find more direct un-modalised statements in the private press today in Cameroon than in the o‰cial press. 4.4. Frequency distribution of adjectival expressions of modality As already mentioned, modality can be expressed by a wide range of linguistic resources including adjectives. Some of these adjectives (the most common) are presented in Figure 4, with their frequency of occurrence per 10,000 words in the CCE and LOB corpus.14

14. Since the modality credentials of these adjectives can only become evident in certain specific contexts such as co-occurrence with forms of BE (e.g. ‘‘I am certain/sure’’, ‘‘it is/was/ þ certain/possible that. . .’’), the adjectives were extracted solely from those contexts.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

55

Figure 4. Adjectival forms expressing modality in CCE and LOB compared

Apart from necessary which expresses epistemic necessity, the rest of the adjectives have been characterised as certainty adjectives (Biber et al. 1999: 637). They can be used to indicate various degrees of certitude of propositions. Generally, these adjectives appear to be less frequent in the CCE. At a more specific level, however, two trends are observable: First, sure seems to be the most frequent adjective used to express modality in CamE; but is also highly restricted in terms of text type. For example, 90.6% (i.e. 29 of 32) of the form occurs in private letters as in examples (51)–(53). (51) Dear Pa, How have you prepared for your GCE? I am sure there is nothing which is still new to you (CCE/PL.txt). (52) puling on with classes? What about your problem? I am sure it is a little bit better. Well I heard of every (CCE/PL.txt). (53) e1, ? How is the cold? I am sure you are enjoying it for I know that you are one (CCE/PL.txt). Second, while in CCE certain and apparent are both less frequent in comparison to LOB, the case of probable is perhaps the most outstanding. Probable and its adverbial counterpart probably (cf. Table 6) are the most frequent forms used to express epistemic modality in the adverbial and adjectival categories in the LOB. These forms are not as frequent in CamE.

56

Daniel A. Nkemleke

4.5. Frequency distribution of modal lexical verbs Modal lexical verbs have often been discussed under the category of performative verbs (cf. note 8); with their chief characteristic being that they usually occur before their complement. However, there are a small number of lexical verbs (equally included in this category) which do not necessarily have to occur before their complement. Urmson (1952: 481) refers to them as parenthetical verbs, i.e., verbs ‘‘which, in the first person present, can be used [. . .] followed by ‘that’ and an indicative clause, or else can be inserted at the middle or end of the indicative sentence.’’ The verbs think, hope, suppose, believe, and feel are some common examples.15 Following this definition, Perkins (1983) suggests that we may also include the impersonal constructions: it seems/seemed, and it appears/appeared in this category of verbs. In this section, I focus on the frequency of these verbs. Figure 5 presents their frequency of occurrence per 10,000 words in the CCE and LOB corpora. The expression I hope indicates the writer’s desire for some event(s) or course of action to occur (i.e. boulomaic modality), the rest of the expressions may tenuously indicate the writer’s belief and/or assumption that a

Figure 5. Modal lexical verb expressions in the CCE and LOB compared

15. Perkins (1983: 97) notes that these verbs appear to refer more to a mental state or attitude than to a specific act. So, they are not used performatively.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

57

certain state of a¤airs is true, likely or false (epistemic modality). In a broader interpretation of modality (following Palmer 1994), both types of expressions may equally be characterised in terms of subjectivity (with ‘I’: I hope) and objectivity (with ‘it’: it seems) or in the terminology of Lyons (1977:799) the ‘I-say-so’ and ‘it-is-the-case’ components respectively. The subjective/objective distinction is relevant in determining the source of modality. In the former, the writer assumes full responsibility for the evaluation of the state of a¤airs reported. S/he is the source of knowledge considered. But in the latter, s/he makes a general statement or reports someone else’s evaluation. As the frequencies in Figure 5 illustrate, there are less objective cases in the Cameroonian corpus. There is evidence of subjectivity in the high frequency of the form I hope, which is boulomaic modality and clearly relates to deontic modality (cf. Perkins 1983: 11). Its distribution across text types is highly skewed, with 93.7% (i.e. 164 of 175) of the corpus citations occurring in private letters (54)–(56): (54) Dearest male1, I can’t express the joy I have in mind to put before you once more these few words of mine which I hope would meet you in quite good condition of health, hope and stay. What of studies and how are you faring on with book work? I hope (CCE/PL.txt). (55) Please I apologised accept my apology. How are you doing over there? I hope fine. I hear you were sick I hope everything is now OK I have many things to meet and chart over. Male2 girl friend is now female1; I personally attended the wedding (CCE/PL.txt). (56) Male1, do you know something? I am shame [sic] to say that I have forgotten your birthday. I hope it did pass well. I wish many more happy years. As for me I am a very big girl now. My mother has the same birthday with me (CCE/PL.txt). 5. Summary and conclusion Throughout this discussion, an attempt has been made to justify two claims. Firstly, the category modality (as it is realised by modals, semimodals, adverbials, adjectives and lexical verbs) seems to be less frequently expressed in CamE as compared to BrE. Secondly, there appears to be strong tendencies for specialisation and/or restriction in the use of certain modal forms. At each stage in the analysis, an attempt has been made to substantiate these claims with empirical evidence from a corpus of naturally-

58

Daniel A. Nkemleke

occurring texts. To the extent that the data source (CCE) may still be considered ‘‘representative’’ of language use in Cameroon today, it may be concluded that modality and its related means of expression appear to be relatively less frequently expressed in Cameroonian written discourse. In addition, the balance between the root and epistemic uses of modals is generally tilted towards the former, suggesting among other things, the general un-modalized character of propositions across text types, be they formal or informal, academic or popular (cf. Nkemleke 2010, 2011).16 Such low frequency of epistemic meanings of modalities in CamE may be accounted for in terms of processing complexity involved in the use of these modal functions. Epistemic uses of modals are more complex because they mark operations on mental representations. That is, what the writer/speaker engages in is conscious reflection on the content of his or her own mental states. Therefore, successful use of epistemic modals requires the writer/speaker to perform deductive operations on abstract propositions and to arrive at a warranted conclusion (Papafragou 1987). These cognitive and logical processes are often expected to reach maturity only later in language acquisition and development (cf. Wellman 1990, Sweetser 1990). The subjective/objective dichotomy is equally marked in CamE, where statements of the type ‘I-say-so’ component are consistently more frequent than the ‘it-is-the-case’ type (cf. Section 4.5). The predominance of subjectively modalized statements have often been associated with ESL users (Heltoft 2005, Nkemleke 2008), and could well reflect universal learner’s strategies which have to do with concepts such as naturalness, markedness, less e¤ort and cognition. These statements may remain constant or fluctuate between L1 and L2 structures. Related studies on modality (though limiting themselves generally to the central and semi-modals) within ESL contexts in Africa and India have documented findings which appear to be in agreement with some of the conclusions drawn in this survey. For example, there seems to be a consensus that the problems encountered by most people (in ESL settings) with the use of modals range from the uncertain grasp of modal functions of the past tense forms to the general uncertainty surrounding their use in complex sentences (see Sey 1973, Kujore 1985, Schmied 1991, Jowitt 1991, for African varieties) as well as certain specialised uses of these forms (see Katikar 1984, for Indian English). These attestations of similarities 16. For a more detailed study of modality in contemporary CamE, i.e. data collected in the 2000s, see my recent publication, Nkemleke (2011).

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

59

(though sometimes based on limited empirical evidence) confirm the validity of the emerging features of modality within these varieties. Furthermore, it is not entirely unlikely that CamE’s limited use of modals to express epistemic meanings, for example, is due to influences of Cameroonian home languages, most of which do not have elaborate systems of modality as English.

References Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geo¤rey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman. Boyd, Julian and J.P. Thorne. 1969. The semantics of modal verbs. Journal of Linguistics 5: 57–74. Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Semantics of Modal Auxiliaries. Croom: Helm. Coates, Jennifer and Geo¤rey Leech. 1980. The meaning of the modals in modern British and American English. York Papers in Linguistics 8: 23–34. Collins, Peter. 1988. The semantics of some modals in contemporary Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 8: 233–258. Collins, Peter. 1991. The modals of obligation and necessity in Australian English. In: Aijmer, Karin and Bengt Altenberg (eds.), English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik. London: Longman. 145–165. Collins, Peter. 2009a. Modals and Quasi-modals in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Collins, Peter. 2009b. Modals and quasi-modals in World Englishes. World Englishes 28(3): 281–292. Facchinetti, Roberta, Manfred Krug and Frank Palmer (eds.). 2003. Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Fawcett, Robin and Michael Perkins. 1980. Child Language Transcripts 6–12, 4 vols. Pontypridd: Department of Behavioural and Communication Studies, Polytechnic of Wales. Fraser, Bruce. 1975. Hedged performatives. In: Cole, Peter and Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. 187– 210. Go¨rlach, Manfred. 1991. Englishes: Studies in Varieties of English, 1984–1988. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Greenbaum, Sidney. 1969. Studies in English Adverbial Usage. London: Longman. Greenbaum, Sidney. 1988. Good English and the Grammarian. London: Longman. Halliday, Michael. 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundation of Language 6: 322–361. Heltoft, Lars. 2005. Modality and subjectivity. In: Klinge, Alex and Henrik H. Mu¨ller (eds.), Modality: Studies in Form and Function. London: Equinox. 81– 101.

60

Daniel A. Nkemleke

Hermere´n, Lars. 1978. On Modality in English: A Study of the Semantics of the Modals. Lund: CWK Greenup. Hoye, Leo. 1997. Adverbs and Modality in English. London: Longman. Huddleston, Rodney and Geo¤rey K. Pullum. 2008. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hyland, Ken. 1998. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Jowitt, David. 1991. Nigerian English Usage: An Introduction. Lagos: Longman. Katikar, Pratibha. 1984. The meanings of the modals in Indian English. Unpublished PhD thesis. Shivaji University, Kolhapur, India. Krogvig, Inger and Stig Johansson. 1981. Shall, will, should and would in British and American English. ICAME Newsletter 5: 32–56. Kujore, Obafemi. 1985. English Usage: Some Notable Nigerian Variations. Ibadan: Evans Brothers Limited. Leech, Geo¤rey. 1971. Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman. Leech, Geo¤rey. 2003. Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992. In: Facchinetti, Roberta et al. (eds.), pp. 223–240. Leech, Geo¤rey. 2007. The changing of linguistic change: Insights from standard corpora over a period of 60 years. Paper presented at the ICAME Conference, Stratford-upon-Avon, May 23–27. Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Vol. II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marino, Matthew. 1973. A feature analysis of the English modals. Lingua 32: 309–323. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2003. A Corpus-based Study of the Modal Verbs in Cameroon Written English. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Yaounde I. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2004a. A corpus-based study of the modal verbs in Cameroonian and British English. CASTALIA: Ibadan Journal of Multicultural / Multidisciplinary Studies 19: 1–23. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2004b. Meaning and context of need and be able to in Cameroon English. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 30(2): 104–114. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2008. Modality in novice academic writing: The case of African and German university students. In: Schmied, Josef and Christoph Haase (eds.), English Projects in Teaching and Research in Central Europe. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. 43–64. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2010. Cameroonian and foreign scholar’s discourse: The rhetoric of conference abstracts. World Englishes 29(2): 173–191. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2011. Exploring Academic Writing in Cameroon English: A Corpus-based Perspective. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Palmer, Frank. 1979. Modality and the English Modals. London: Longman. Palmer, Frank. 1987. The English Verb. London: Longman. Palmer, Frank. 1994. Mood and modality. In: Asher, Ron E. (ed.), The Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 2535–2540. Papafragou, Anna. 1987. Modality in language development: A reconsideration of the evidence. Working Papers in Linguistics 9, Department of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College, London. 77–105.

The expression of modality in Cameroon English

61

Perkins, Michael. 1980. The Expression of Modality in English. PhD thesis, The Polytechnic of Wales, C.N.A.A. Perkins, Michael. 1981. The development of modal expressions in the spontaneous speech of 6- to 12-year-old children. Work in Progress (Edinburgh University) 14: 54–61. Perkins, Michael. 1982. The core meaning of the English modals. Journal of Linguistics 18: 245–273. Perkins, Michael. 1983. Modal Expressions in English. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Quirk, Randolph. 1995. Grammatical and Lexical Variance in English. London: Longman. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geo¤rey Leech and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. Rescher, Nicholas. 1968. Topics in Philosophical Logic. Dordrecht: Reidel. Sey, Kofi. 1973. Ghanaian English: An Exploratory Survey. London: Macmillan. Schmied, Josef. 1991. English in Africa: An Introduction. London: Longman. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2002. Watch Your English! A Collection of Remedial Lessons on English Usage. 2nd ed. Yaounde: B&K Language Institute. Smith, Nicholas. 2003. Changes in modals and semi-modals of strong obligation and epistemic necessity in recent British English. In: Facchinetti, Roberta et al. (eds.), pp. 241–266. Sweetser, Eve. 1982. Root and epistemic modality: Causality in two worlds. Berkeley Linguistic Society Papers 8: 484–507. Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Urmson, James. 1952. Parenthetical verbs. Mind 61: 480–496. von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1951. An Essay in Modal Logic. Amsterdam: North Holland. Wellman, Henry. 1990. The Child’s Theory of Mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Wells, Gordon. 1979. Learning and using the auxiliary verb in English. In: Lee, Victor (ed.), Language Development. London: Crom Helm. 250–270.

Chapter 3 A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English and other world Englishes Hans-Georg Wolf 1. Introduction In the past few years, Cameroon English (CamE), besides Nigerian English, arguably has become one of the best-researched varieties of West African English, if not African English in general. This claim holds true for the scope of research as well as for the methodological approaches taken. The number of publications is too vast to provide a comprehensive review here. However, the following are major, book-length studies on CamE – the term includes Cameroon Pidgin English – Mbassi-Manga (1973), Todd (1982), Simo Bobda (1994), Wolf (2001), Schro¨der (2003), Atechi (2006), Anchimbe (2006), Ouafeu (2006), Kouega (2006, 2007, 2008), Ngefac (2008), Mbangwana and Sala (2009), and Nkemleke (2011). These authors have concentrated on a range of topics, including the sociolinguistics of CamE (especially Mbassi-Manga 1973, Todd 1982, and Wolf 2001), its phonetic and phonological features (Simo Bobda 1994, Atechi 2006, Ouafeu 2006), its morpho-syntactic patterns (especially Mbassi-Manga 1973, Fe´ral 1989, Schro¨der 2003, and Anchimbe 2006), its syntax (Mbangwana and Sala 2009), and its lexicon (especially Kouega 2006, 2007). CamE has also provided the material for the application of novel linguistic frameworks incorporating some of these aspects. For example, mainly inspired by Mufwene’s theory of language contact and ecology, Anchimbe (2006) has proposed an integrative approach to describe the evolution of indigenized varieties of English with CamE as a model. He uses the metaphor of filters – taken from the literature on the sociolinguistic ecology of the language or variety in question – to elucidate how speech patterns and linguistic forms find their way into it and in that process lead to the emergence of a standard. Anchimbe focuses on a number of dimensions in which the results of this filtering process are evident (morpho-syntactical, lexical, and semantic-pragmatic). By o¤ering an explanatory paradigm, he goes beyond the simple description of features, as characteristic of earlier accounts of CamE.

64

Hans-Georg Wolf

From a di¤erent angle, the cognitive sociolinguistic framework used by Wolf (1999, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006), Wolf and Simo Bobda (2001), Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006, 2007, 2009), Polzenhagen (2007), and Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007) also broadens the investigative scope. Applied to world Englishes, the main concern of Cognitive Sociolinguistics is to o¤er insights into the linguistic realization of cultural conceptualizations. In this attempt, Cognitive Sociolinguistics is part of the wider e¤ort to empirically study the culture-language interface, which is gaining more ground in sociolinguistics.1 In the following, I will first briefly outline the genesis of the cognitive sociolinguistic study of CamE and African English in general, with reference to some critical views on this approach. In the main part of this chapter, I will demonstrate how cultural-conceptual information can be made maximally explicit in a variety dictionary by means of cognitive sociolinguistic tools. The short sample dictionary is made up of lexemes commonly found in CamE; these lexemes are either specific to this variety or used in ways which diverge from common core usage.

2. The cognitive sociolinguistic approach to Cameroon English The cognitive sociolinguistic approach to CamE was first tested in Wolf (2001). During my early investigations of this variety, and in communicating with its speakers, I felt that structuralist approaches were not adequate to capture the di¤erent worldview palpable in these encounters. It became clear that a semantic dimension is involved that has to be sought out at the broader conceptual level, and that corresponding methodological tools are required. A worldview is a particular cultural perspective on reality, and to the extent that speakers of a given variety di¤er in their worldview from speakers of other varieties, one can speak of cultural di¤erences. My background in conceptual metaphor theory had alerted me to the fact that networks of conceptual metaphors are tied to cultures, not necessarily languages or language varieties (see Wolf 1994). Hence, although speakers of the various first and second-language varieties of English basically use the same linguistic material – apart from variety specific lexical items – the meaning and value these lexical items or linguistic constructions may

1. See, e.g., the newly-found journal ETC (Empirical Text and Culture Research), dedicated to quantitative empirical studies of culture.

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

65

have can be quite di¤erent. In Wolf (2001), I tried to systematize these di¤erences with respect to the conceptual domain of family/community. Although Cognitive Sociolinguistics had not been defined as a field of research at that time, the approach I adopted falls squarely into what now has been established as a new research paradigm within Cognitive Linguistics and world Englishes.2 The culture-specific conceptualizations pertaining to the domain in question – such as kinship for community/community for kinship and ancestors are spirits – concurred with the results of collocational and keyword analyses based on the Corpus of CamE, where terms relating to family and community were found to be significantly more frequent than in Western varieties of English, and where, e.g., ancestral spirit(s) has the status of a fixed expression. Admittedly, at this early stage, my cognitive sociolinguistic study of CamE was not without problems. Critics pointed out the gap in time between the Corpus of CamE and the reference corpora (Leitner 2001), the disjunction of the formal-functional and culturalfunctional approach (Leitner 2001), and the generality of the cultural model referred to (Mair 2007: 457–458). These flaws have been rectified in later studies (see above), in which the methodological apparatus was fine-tuned, the network of conceptualizations elaborated, and formal and functional elements of the cultural model integrated. Yet the cognitive sociolinguistic approach to CamE not only faced methodological criticisms, but also a theoretical challenge. Huber (2004: 209–210), in a review of English in Cameroon (Wolf 2001), argued that the cognitive linguistic approach was not viable because ‘‘linguistic peculiarities’’ in the worldview of Cameroonians are nearly absent. This stance implies a restricted view of linguistic variation, which goes back to the language-thought divide intrinsic to structural linguistics (see Wolf 2008). By now, the vast potential of Cognitive Sociolinguistics for the comprehensive description of linguistic and conceptual variation has been convincingly demonstrated (see, e.g., Kristiansen and Dirven 2008). In the following, I would like to highlight another area in which cognitive sociolinguistic principles can be fruitfully applied, namely the lexicological description of second language varieties from a conceptual perspective.

2. On ‘Cognitive Sociolinguistics’ and the disciplinary delineation and development, see Wolf and Polzenhagen (2009) and Wolf (2008).

66

Hans-Georg Wolf

3. A variety-dictionary based on cognitive sociolinguistic principles As I have argued in Wolf (2001: 244–245), nativization of English is a bidirectional process. On the one hand, a variety is shaped by the particular conceptualizations and their corresponding linguistic material prevalent in the speech community (cf. Anchimbe’s model mentioned in the introduction), but on the other hand, lexico-semantic material provided by the common core is embedded and semantically reconfigured in these very conceptualizations (cf. Kachru 1983: 9). It is for this reason that structuralist or componential-analytic approaches to the lexicon cannot in all cases adequately capture the semantics of variety-specific items.3 No doubt, a great number of such items are definitorily unproblematic. Terms from, for example, the domains of food, clothing, administration, flora and fauna can be explained without semantic loss, and the representation of their symbolic value in the given society is not of concern to dictionary makers in general. However, in many cases, conceptual information is relevant to comprehending the full meaning of an item, especially if these items are tied to culturally salient conceptual networks.4 The sample dictionary below is intended to highlight the importance of the systematic representation of conceptual information in dictionaries, especially variety dictionaries.5 Among the makers of monolingual standard dictionaries, this importance has been realized by the team of the Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners (MED 2002). In it, an initial step was made towards the inclusion of such information for British English. So-called ‘‘metaphor boxes’’ list conventional metaphors and their linguistic expression for specific target domains (e.g., argument, time, ideas, understanding) and are attached to the entries for central target-domain keywords. The number of these boxes in the MED (2002) was still small (about 40), but has been augmented to over 60 in the second edition (MED 2007). After the development of corpus-based and thus more explicitly usage-based dictionaries, Macmillan may have started

3. For a cognitive-linguistic critique of such approaches to semantics, see Taylor (2003: 27–40). 4. On the concept of ‘conceptual’ or ‘metaphoric network,’ see Polzenhagen (2007: 70–74) and Wolf and Polzenhagen (2009: ch. 2.1). 5. The idea for such a dictionary goes back to a proposal by Ko¨vecses (2001) for an idiom dictionary, and Adegbija’s (2003) discussion of this proposal in the context of second-language idioms.

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

67

a second ‘‘revolution’’ in practical lexicography; deliberately or coincidentally following the theoretical orientations in Cognitive Linguistics in general. With respect to the lexicographic description of world Englishes, this trend inevitably leads to the representation of salient culture-specific conceptualizations typical of these varieties. If this type of information is made explicit and available, a more profound comparative perspective regarding the di¤erent varieties of English can be taken. The sample dictionary consists of lexemes commonly found in CamE, which are a) either specific to this variety or b) used in ways which diverge from common core usage. This dictionary is developed on the basis of respective pilot presentations in Polzenhagen (2007) and Wolf and Polzenhagen (2009), and Cummings and Wolf (2011) for Hong Kong English, and focuses on items found in CamE specifically. The data itself comes from a West African English dictionary project jointly conducted by Lothar Peter, Frank Polzenhagen, and myself (see Peter and Wolf 2008). The text examples are also mostly taken from this database or from the Corpus of CamE. Following standard dictionary practice and for the sake of clarity, I will not attest the source of each text example in the entry. In the finalized version of such a variety-dictionary, the sources would be identified in an appendix. Since my focus is exclusively on CamE, only those items in the database are used here that have the country label ‘‘Cameroon’’. Some of the entries and conceptualizations listed below are shared by other varieties of West African English – i.e., (to) eat sb., (to) eat money, herbalist, juju, juju-man, thick madame – while other lexemes are specific to CamE – i.e., evu, gombo (in sense 2), kong, kwifon, makalapati, mimbo (in sense 3), ngambe man, nyongo, soya. The sample dictionary has a dual structure: The first component covers not only the standard description of a selected entry in terms of form, origin (if known), and meaning but also includes the underlying conceptual domain or, if a definition crosses domain boundaries, culture-specific conceptualizations.6 Besides, each definition comes with an authentic text example. The information provided in the first component links up to the second, thesaurus-like component of the dictionary. In it, selected key domains and salient conceptualizations therein are listed. Part A of the thesaurus is arranged according to target domains and establishes crossreferences to relevant lexical items or text examples listed in the first 6. The question of domain boundary involves a cultural perspective; hence, the question of whether a conceptualization is a metaphor or not cannot be easily answered (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2009: 58–60).

68

Hans-Georg Wolf

component. Thus, lexical fields and relations between lexical items can be recovered which are not or only partially retrievable from the alphabetically organized component. Part B of the thesaurus, in turn, is arranged according to source-domains and contains references to the target-domain component; thereby, further relevant conceptualizations and lexical items are revealed. The sample entries concentrate on the interrelated domains of corruption, death, eating, gift-giving, people, power, resources, and witchcraft, which so far have been described in greatest detail from a cognitive sociolinguistic perspective (see Wolf and Simo Bobda 2001, Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006, 2007, 2009, Polzenhagen 2007, and Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007). 3.1. First component (to) eat sb. (fixed expression). Definition: ‘to cause sb. to get sick or die by means of witchcraft in order to take the person’s life forces, i.e., to become rich’. Text example: The mother was suspected to have eaten her own child. Underlying conceptualizations: witchcraft is eating, people are resources [target domains % witchcraft, % people] [source domains % resources, % eating]. (to) eat money (fixed expression). Definition: ‘to extort money from sb.’, ‘to use somebody else’s money’, ‘to waste money’, ‘to embezzle money’. Text example: How many million promises can fill a bucket when you eat money the way locusts eat tons of green. Underlying conceptualizations: money is food, being corrupt is eating, being in power is being able to eat [target domains % resources, % corruption] [source domain % eating]. evu (n.). Source language: Ewondo. Definition: ‘a Beti witchcraft notion’ Text example: The force of witchcraft evu is found in each person – it can be activated for evil or for good. Underlying conceptualization: witchcraft is a hungry beast living inside one’s belly [target domain % witchcraft] [source domain % eating]. gombo (n.). Definition: 1. ‘ocra’ (Abelmoschus esculentus). Text example: The women were using gombo to prepare a soup. 2. ‘corruption, bribe’. Alternate spelling: gambo, ngombo. Text Example: And this is not a guarantee that your ‘‘element’’ will be aired, unless the realizer and the assembler in the studio have received their share of ‘‘gombo’’. Underlying conceptualizations: a bribe is food, being in power is being able to eat [target domains % resources, % corruption] [source domain % eating].

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

69

herbalist (n.). Definition: ‘a traditional medicine-man believed to possess supernatural power’, ‘witch-doctor’. Text example: His friend took him to a herbalist where Mr. Samuel Vefungsi gave o¤ the ghost with the pay voucher in his pocket. Underlying conceptualization: a person with special powers is a witch [target domain % power] [source domain % witchcraft]. juju (n.). Definition: ‘broad term for persons or things related to witchcraft or the supernatural’. Text example: . . . Village jujus that used to preempt such fetish killings . . . Underlying domain: witchcraft.7 juju-man (n.). Definition: ‘sb. believed to possess supernatural power’, ‘witch-doctor’. Text example: He convinced the manager of the juju-man’s powers. Underlying conceptualization: a person with special powers is a witch [target domain % power] [source domain % witchcraft]. kola (n.). Definition: 1. ‘fruit used as a stimulant, often o¤ered as gift to guests’ (Cola acuminata and Cola epidonta). 2. ‘corruption, bribe; money.’ Text example: He therefore tells the Chief of Manawhoneybee village that his. . . name can only go on the radio if [he] brought something; and of course, the chief gives him money (kola). Underlying conceptualizations: money is food, a bribe is a gift, being in power is being able to eat [target domains % resources, % corruption] [source domains % eating, % gift giving]. kong (n.). Definition: ‘killing through witchcraft’. Text example: A session of public and daytime ‘‘witch-doctoring’’ was organised in the village in the presence of everyone in the course of which the herbalist told the villagers that Kambang was killed by ‘‘kong’’. Underlying conceptualization: death is a sign of witchcraft, people are resources [target domains % people % death] [source domain % witchcraft]. kwifon (n.). Definition: ‘associate of the fon possessing occult power, highest authority in traditional belief ’. Alternate spelling: kwifoyn, kwifoin. Text example: The Post gathered that the Kwifon had attempted to traditionally try Raphael Ngong, who allegedly caused the death of one Suh, by stopping water from flowing from the tap through witchcraft. Underlying conceptualization: a person with special powers is a witch [target domain % power] [source domain % witchcraft]. 7. This item only evokes the general domain of witchcraft, but no particular conceptualization.

70

Hans-Georg Wolf

makalapati (makala pati). (n.). Source language: Duala, Basaa (makala), Ewondo (mekali). Definition: 1. ‘a sort of doughnut’ 2. ‘a bribe’. Text example: For sure, we shall still fight to end the makalapati. Underlying conceptualization: a bribe is food, being in power is being able to eat [target domains % resources, % corruption]. mimbo (n.). Definition: 1. ‘beer-like drink obtained from the ra‰a palm tree’. 2. ‘drink in general’. 3. ‘a bribe’. Text example: Take this as mimbo. Underlying conceptualization: a bribe is a drink, being in power is being able to drink [target domains % resources, % corruption] [source domain % drinking]. ngambe man (n.). Definition: ‘diviner, witchdoctor’. Alternate spelling: ngambeyman. Text example: But my uncle also said that many of these selfproclaimed witch doctors, medicine men, ngambe men (diviners), sorcerers – the list goes on – were quacks. Underlying conceptualization: a person with special powers is a witch [target domain % power] [source domain % witchcraft]. nyongo (n.). Definition: ‘witchcraft; mystical secret society’. Text example: She accused her of belonging to a nyongo secret society that used human sacrifice to build its wealth. Underlying conceptualizations: death is witchcraft, people are resources [target domains % death, % people] [source domains % witchcraft, % resources] soya (n.). Source language: Haussa. Definition: 1. ‘fried beef skewers’. 2. ‘a bribe’. Text example: The council allows . . . citizens to be able to do their work, to tell who has eaten soya. Fixed expression: to have eaten soya ‘to have accepted a bribe’. Underlying conceptualizations: a bribe is food, being in power is being able to eat [target domains % resources, % corruption] [source domain % eating]. thick madame (fixed expression). Definition: ‘wealthy, influential woman’. Text example: . . . simply trying to go to where. . . a ‘‘thick madame’’ with strong connections can send them [criminals] back to ‘‘work’’ just with a couple of phone calls? Underlying conceptualization: being important is being big, being big is being important,8 being rich is being big, enrich-

8. These conceptualizations are interchangeable; a physically big/‘‘thick’’ person is usually considered important, qua being in power is being able to eat / drink, and wealthy and important persons are metaphorized as big, regardless of their physical stature (more often than not, though, in Cameroon, as elsewhere in Africa, big is not a metaphor but a metonymy).

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

71

ment is eating [target domains % resources, material wealth, power] [source domain % physical size]. 3.2. Second component 3.2.1. Target domains corruption being corrupt is eating and feeding eat money a bribe is food / a drink gombo, kola, makalapati, mimbo, soya a bribe is a gift kola death death is a sign of witchcraft the herbalist told the villagers that Kambang was killed by ‘‘kong’’ people people are resources . . . to eat sb. power a person with special powers is a witch herbalist, juju-man, kwifon, ngambe man, traditional healer, witch-doctor being in power is being able to eat / drink They have taken food o¤ his plate (said in Cameroon when a government o‰cial is dropped). They have given him plenty to eat (said in Cameroon when a new government o‰cial is appointed) being big is being important a ‘‘thick madame’’ with strong connections being important is being big resources resources are food you eat money the way locusts eat tons of green witchcraft witchcraft is eating (to) eat sb. witchcraft is a hungry beast living inside one’s belly evu

72

Hans-Georg Wolf

3.2.2 Source domains eating % corruption % death % material wealth % people % power % resources % witchcraft gift giving % corruption % resources resources people are resources witchcraft % corruption % people % power % resources The socio-cultural usefulness of such a lexicographic arrangement is made evident in the revelation of a network of conceptualizations. More or less strong links and overlaps exist between the various domains, and even subtle and linguistically implicit shades of meaning are exposed. A case in point is being big. In Cameroonian or West African society in general, big men or thick madames are rarely directly accused of witchcraft. However, through the fact that being big belongs to the domain of power, and that power, in turn is directly or indirectly linked to corruption, resources, eating, and witchcraft, big persons are implicated in witchcraft, i.e., they are often viewed as having acquired their status and wealth by means of witchcraft (for an elaboration, see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2009: ch. 2.2.5).

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

73

4. Conclusion This chapter argued for the viability of the cognitive sociolinguistic approach to reveal culture-specific conceptualizations in world Englishes. CamE has been among the first varieties to which this approach was applied and where its usefulness was demonstrated. In opposition to a structuralist view of language, which does not consider the investigation of conceptual structure as part of the linguistic enterprise, cognitive sociolinguistics holds conceptual variation to be a crucial dimension of linguistic enquiry. One particular area of applying cognitive sociolinguistic principles is lexicography. Only in recent years has the incorporation of conceptual information in lexicographic projects focusing on the English language received some attention. Given the multi-varietal nature of English, such information is not only important for learners of the language but also vital for cross-varietal understanding. Cognitive sociolinguistic studies of African English, and of CamE in particular, have shown that conceptualizations are realized in the respective varieties that di¤er markedly from conceptualizations one finds in other varieties. It is my firm belief that these di¤erences need to be accounted for in variety-specific dictionaries if deeper insights are to be gained not only into the meaning and use of certain words, but also into the culture of the speakers of these varieties. To demonstrate how conceptual information can be incorporated and made explicit in entries from a varietydictionary, a list of sample entries covering lexical items from CamE was compiled. The sample included items related to the target domains of corruption, death, eating, gift-giving, people, power, resources, and witchcraft. These domains are salient in CamE and form part of a conceptual network one would not find in non-African varieties of English. The dictionary reveals this network in that in the entries themselves, relevant conceptualizations are provided, which in turn can be found in a thesaurus-like part organized according to target and source domains, subsuming the respective conceptualizations. Such a design has been applied to A Dictionary of Hong Kong English (Cummings and Wolf 2011), and will find its application in the future Exclusive Dictionary of West African English (cf. Peter and Wolf 2008) and, it is to be hoped, also in other variety-specific dictionaries of English. References Adegbija, Efurosibina. 2003. Idiomatic variation in Nigerian English. In: Lucko, Peter et al. (eds.), pp. 41–56.

74

Hans-Georg Wolf

Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006. Cameroon English: Authenticity, Ecology and Evolution. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Atechi, Samuel N. 2006. The Intelligibility of Native and Non-native English Speech: A Comparative Analysis of Cameroon English and American and British English. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Cummings, Patrick J. and Hans-Georg Wolf. A Dictionary of Hong Kong English: Words from the Fragmented Harbor. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Fe´ral, Carole de. 1989. Pidgin-English du Cameroun: Description Linguistique et Sociolinguistique. Paris: Peeters/Selaf. Huber, Magnus. 2004. Review of Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 19(1): 207–210. Kachru, Braj B. 1983. Introduction: The other side of English. In: Kachru, Braj B. (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Oxford: Pergamon. 1–12. Kouega, Jean-Paul. 2006. Aspects of Cameroon English Usage: A Lexical Appraisal. Munich: LINCOM. Kouega, Jean-Paul. 2007. A Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Kouega, Jean-Paul. 2008. A Dictionary of Cameroon Pidgin English Usage: Pronunciation, Grammar and Vocabulary. Munich: LINCOM. Ko¨vecses, Zolta´n. 2001. A cognitive linguistic view of learning idioms in an FLT context. In: Pu¨tz, Martin, Susanne Niemeier and Rene´ Dirven (eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 87– 115. Kristiansen, Gitte and Rene´ Dirven (eds.). 2008. Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Leitner, Gerhard. 2001. Review of Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. The LINGUIST LIST 12.2297. Lucko, Peter, Lothar Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.). 2003. Studies in African Varieties of English. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. 2002. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. 2007. 2nd ed. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Mair, Christian. 2007. Varieties of English around the world: Collocational and cultural profiles. In: Skandera, Paul (ed.), pp. 437–468. Mbangwana, Paul N. and Bonaventure M. Sala. 2009. Cameroon English Morphology and Syntax: Current Trends in Action. Munich: LINCOM. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon: A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Ngefac, Aloysius. 2008. Social Di¤erentiation in Cameroon English: Evidence from Sociolinguistic Fieldwork. New York: Peter Lang. Nkemleke, Daniel A. 2011. Exploring Academic Writing in Cameroon English: A Corpus-based Perspective. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier.

A cognitive sociolinguistic approach to the lexicon of Cameroon English

75

Ouafeu, Talla Sando Y. 2006. Intonational Meaning in Cameroon English Discourse: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Peter, Lothar and Hans-Georg Wolf. 2008. Compiling an exclusive dictionary of West African English: A report on work in progress. In: Simo Bobda, Augustin (ed.), Explorations into Language Use in Africa. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 221–234. Polzenhagen, Frank. 2007. Cultural Conceptualisations in West African English. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Polzenhagen, Frank and Hans-Georg Wolf. 2007. Culture-specific conceptualisations of corruption in African English: Linguistic analyses and pragmatic applications. In: Sharifian, Farzad and Gary Palmer (eds.), Applied Cultural Linguistics: Implications for Second Language Learning and Intercultural Communication. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 125–168. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English. An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Gunter Narr. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994. Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Bern: Peter Lang. Skandera, Paul (ed.). 2007. Phraseology and Culture in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Taylor, John. 2003. Linguistic Categorization. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Todd, Loreto. 1982. Cameroon. (Varieties of English around the World. T1). Heidelberg: Groos. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 1994. A Folk Model of the ‘Internal Self ’ in Light of the Contemporary View of Metaphor – The Self as Subject and Object. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 1999. From mother tongue to second language: The cultural model of ‘community’ in African English. La Langue Maternelle: Cahiers Charles V 27: 75–91. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2003. The contextualization of common core terms in West African English: Evidence from computer corpora. In: Lucko, Peter et al. (eds.), pp. 3–20. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2004. Cultural approaches to second language varieties of English: A call for new methodologies and a review of some findings on (West) African English. In: Schro¨der, Anne (ed.), Crossing Borders: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Africa. Mu¨nster: LIT Verlag. 133–149. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2006. Religion and traditional belief in West African English: A linguistic analysis. In: Omoniyi, Tope and Joshua A. Fishman (eds.), Readings in the Sociology of Language and Religion. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 42–59. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2008. A cognitive linguistic approach to the cultures of World Englishes: The emergence of a new model. In: Kristiansen and Dirven (eds.), pp. 353–385. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen. 2006. Intercultural communication in English: Arguments for a cognitively-oriented approach to intercultural pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(3): 285–322.

76

Hans-Georg Wolf

Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen. 2007. Fixed expressions as manifestations of cultural conceptualizations: Examples from African varieties of English. In: Skandera, Paul (ed.), pp. 399–435. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen. 2009. World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Augustin Simo Bobda. 2001. The African cultural model of community in English language instruction in Cameroon: The need for more systematicity. In Pu¨tz, Martin, Susanne Niemeier and Rene´ Dirven (eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics: Theory, Acquisition and Language Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 225–259.

Chapter 4 Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process Augustin Simo Bobda 1. Introduction The past three decades have witnessed tremendous advances in the study of Cameroon English (CamE) phonology. For example, Masanga (1983), Mbangwana (1987), Kouega (1991) and works like Todd (1982) on West African English in general provide, from a structural perspective, inventories of features characteristic of educated speakers. Simo Bobda (1994), studying CamE from the vantage point of generative phonology, pushes the investigation further by finding out a set of phonological rules parallel to those of Inner Circle English (Kachru 1985) which generate features of CamE. The concept of the Trilateral Process (Simo Bobda 1994, Simo Bobda and Chumbow 1999) is derived from this perspective. The Trilateral Process (TLP) refers to a three-sided phenomenon: side AA’ represents the change in Inner Circle English (RP used here as a reference) from the underlying representation (UR) A to the surface form (SF) A’; side AB represents the change of A to a parallel New English (in this case CamE) UR B; and side BB’ represents the rules of the New English which generate New English surface forms B’. The Trilateral Process in its original format is schematically represented as (1). (1) A

B

A’

B’

To be more explicit, if the three sides involving URs are represented by dotted lines, and a new fourth side A’B’ representing the change from, say, an RP surface form A’ to a New English surface form B’, is included, the TLP, which will become quadrilateral, will appear as in (2).

78

Augustin Simo Bobda

(2) A

B

A’

B’

This chapter further explores the di¤erent sides of the Trilateral Process and argues for its usefulness in accounting for the facts of New Englishes. 2. The A’B’ axis and explanations of di¤erences based on surface forms Most of the descriptive literature on New Englishes has so far been based on surface forms. These forms have generally been attributed to interference from the speakers’ source language(s) whose sound system(s) learners substitute for the sound system of the target language; e.g. CamE [, e, ] for RP [, ei, ], respectively, in courageous (CamE [kred‰s]); [i, u, §, ] for [i, u:, ‰, ], respectively, in intrusion (CamE [intru§n]. Interference also accounts for di¤erences in segment sequences. For example, African Englishes exhibit a wide range of patterns of simplification of these sequences, drastically reducing the heavy consonant cluste rs characteristic of Inner Circle Englishes. Common examples in some West African Englishes include the dropping of the final alveolar plosive when it is preceded by another alveolar (e.g. han’, pos’, tol’ for hand, post, told ), or the typical /i, / insertion in East and Southern African Englishes, as in the extreme case of [aenisiti] against.1 A non-interference approach to the explication of pronunciation features of New Englishes includes the consideration of the colonial input and intralingual factors. The colonial input has to do with the particular features that were transplanted by the initial models of the speakers, many of whom are widely documented not to have been speakers of what is regarded today as the standard. The example of // as the substitute for RP // in West Africa, which Harris (1996: 34) says was transplanted in West Africa when the STRUT vowel was still round, can be given as an illustration. The many other cases where African pronunciation features reflect particular regional features in Britain or in America encourage the investigator to take possible colonialists from these regions as the providers of the input for those features. 1. See Simo Bobda (2007a) for a comprehensive discussion of the phenomenon across African Englishes.

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

79

Intralingual factors can be illustrated by classic cases of spelling pronunciation such as CamE [tm] tomb, [swd, -t] sword, Ste[f ]en and overgeneralization of reading rules as in z[i]lous (cf. zeal ), mascul[ai]ne (cf line, mine). But there are other interesting phenomena, such as vowel assimilation, preservation of contrast, and the influence of deviant spellings. The following data from CamE illustrate vowel assimilation and involve, respectively, /i/, /u/, /e/, //. (3) Some examples of vowel assimilation in CamE Vowel assimilation involving /i/: [mitini, d‰ini, kntinis] mutiny, junior, continuous Vowel assimilation involving /u/: [prudjus, sulu§n, prumus] produce, solution, Primus (a CamE forename) Vowel assimilation involving /e/: [ekedemik] academic Vowel assimilation involving /a/: [varanda, sajans] veranda, science Vowel assimilation involving //: [rbt, tms, kmmret] Robert, Thomas, commemorate The need to preserve contrast between words which otherwise might be confused can be held responsible for some pronunciations in CamE. The pronunciation of the following words illustrates the point: there, their; your, yours; paper, pepper. While there and their are homophonous in RP, they are pronounced in CamE as [d] and [dea, dia, di], respectively. Your and its derivative yours have the same vowel /:/ in RP; but CamE speakers have two distinct vowels for the two words as [ jua] and [ jus], respectively. Following the rules of CamE phonology (see Simo Bobda 1994), one expects paper and pepper to be homophonous as [pepa]; but the two forms are distinct in CamE as [pepa] and [pepe], respectively, presumably to preserve the di¤erence between the two words. The many deviant pronunciations which can be attributed to deviant spellings include the realization of the last vowels of mattress, incur, and the stressing of interpret. The CamE pronunciation of mattress is [ma¨tras], which matches the spelling of the word by many educated Cameroonians as *mattrass. That of incur is [iШkj], which matches the spelling of the word as *incure, where the last syllable rhymes with the word cure (CamE [kj]). The stressing of interpret as inter’pret, reflects the spelling of the word by many educated Cameroonians as *interprete where, according to the reading rules of English, the grapheme suggests a heavy syllable which, in word-final position, normally attracts stress. In fact, in all the

80

Augustin Simo Bobda

foregoing cases, deviant spelling and deviant pronunciation are mutually supportive, helping each other to take root.2 The above accounts are error analysis-based. But the Trilateral Process approach o¤ered here takes a di¤erent route altogether, better explained by analysing the di¤erent axes that make up the trilateral chart.

3. The AA’ axis The AA’ axis is based on the well-known fact established by classics like Chomsky and Halle’s (1968) Sound Pattern of English (SPE) that pronunciation features have underlying representations (A), which are changed into surface forms (A’) by phonological rules. Phonological rules of Inner Circle English have been further extended and documented by scholars like Wells (1982), Rubach (1984) and Kreidler (1989), while other scholars have started the same work on some New Englishes (e.g. Simo Bobda 1994, 2007 on Cameroon English and Nigerian English, respectively). Table (4) o¤ers a range of some major rules of Inner Circle English, selected on the basis of their relevance to the features under consideration in this study; e.g. whether or how a particular Inner Circle rule applies in CamE. Sources are given only for rules deemed little known. (4) Some relevant Inner Circle English phonological rules Rule

Explanation/Prose statement

Example of an input/UR

Output

Assimilation

A phenomenon whereby a sound takes on one or more features of a neighbouring sound

i[n]possible new[z]paper

i[m]possible new[s]paper

/ai/ laxing (after Rubach 1984: 43)

The diphthong /ai/ laxes to /i/ before a consonant /§/ followed by þion.

rev[ai]sion coll[ai]sion

rev[i]sion coll[i]sion

CC-laxing

A vowel becomes lax before a consonant cluster in a derived word.

red[i:]mption f[ai]fth

red[]mption f[i]fth

2. For a more detailed and better illustrated analysis of the facts of CamE pronunciation shown here, see Simo Bobda (2000).

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

81

Rule

Explanation/Prose statement

Example of an input/UR

Output

CiV Tensing

Vowels become tense in the environment of one consonant followed by /i/ and a vowel.

com[]dian gymn[æ]sium

com[i:]dian gymn[ei]sium

Cluster simplification

A consonant is deleted before an identical consonant.

su[pp]ose a[ss]ume

su[p]ose a[s]ume

Final g-deletion

// is deleted between a nasal and a following # boundary, or word-finally after a nasal.

si[Ð]er si[Ð]

si[Ð]er si[Ð]

Gliding

The high front vowel changes to a palatal glide between an alveolar consonant followed by a morpheme boundary and a vowel.

conci[zi]on proce[di]ure

conci[zj]on3 proce[dj]ure3

Palatalisation

Palatalization, which must apply after gliding (see above), converts /t, d, s, z/, into [t§, d‰, §, ‰] before the palatal glide /j/ followed by an unstressed vowel.

fa[sj]al conci[zj]on proce[dj]ure

fa[§j]al3 conci[‰j]on3 proce[d‰j]ure3

Glide deletion

/j/ is deleted after all palatals.

fa[§j]al conci[‰j]on proce[d‰j]ure

fa[§]al conci[‰]on proce[d‰]ure

L-Allophonic Rule

/l/ becomes dark before a consonant or in word-final position.

mi[l]k Pau[l]

mi[ł]k Pau[ł]

N-deletion

/n/ is deleted in final position after word-final /m/ or /m/ followed by a # boundary.

colu[mn] conde[mn]ing

colu[m] conde[m]ing

Pre-r Breaking

// is inserted between a nonlow vowel and a following /r/. Pre-R breaking is followed by laxing of /i:/ and /u:/

p[i:]riod pl[u:]ral

p[i]riod pl[]ral

Pre-Vocalic Tensing

A vowel becomes tense in the environment of a following vowel

formul[æ]ic var[i]ety

formul[ei]ic var[ai]ety

3. Note that that [zj], [dj], [§j] are themselves inputs to further processes eventually yielding [‰], [d‰], [§], respectively, as the final outputs through rules such as palatalisation and glide deletion.

82

Augustin Simo Bobda

Rule

Explanation/Prose statement

Example of an input/UR

Output

R- Insertion (Wells 1982: 222)

/r/ is inserted between a vowel and a following word beginning with a vowel across a word boundary. (When there is no orthographic (e.g Martha_and Sue) the occurrence of /r/ is known as intrusive).

fou ø o’clock ca ø owner

fou[r] o’clock ca[r] owner

SAllomorphy (Rubach 1984: 45)

/t/ and /d/ change to [s] before certain su‰xes including -ory, -is, -ive, -ible

cri[t]is respon[d]ible

cri[s]is respon[s]ible

Ks-voicing

/ks/ is voiced to [gz] before a stressed vowel.

e[ks]ecutive e[ks]am

e[gz]ecutive e[gz]am

Intervocalic S- voicing

In a large number of English words the alveolar fricative becomes [z] between two vowels.

vi[s]it Jo[s]eph

vi[z]it jo[z]eph

Spirantisation

/t/ and /d/ change to [s] and [z] respectively before a su‰x beginning with a high front vowel or a palatal glide. Palataliisation then converts /s/ and /z/ to [§] and [‰], respectively.

conver[t]ion conclu[d]ion

conver[s]ion conclu[z]ion

Schwa deletion

Schwa deletion, also called syncope (Lass 1982:187) in some cases is a rule whereby // is deleted after a stressed syllable, especially in the environment of a following consonantal sonorant.

sudd[n] trib[l]

sudd[n†] trib[l]

Syllabic consonant formation

The consonantal sonorants /n, l, r, m/ often acquire syllabic status after a prior application of the schwa deletion rule.

sudd[n] trib[l]

sudd[n†] trib[l]

Trisyllabic Laxing

Also known as trisyllabic shortening, trisyllabic laxing laxes vowels in antepenultimate syllables of derived words.

div[ai]nity ser[i:]nity sinc[i]rity

div[i]nity ser[]nity sinc[]rity

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

Rule

Explanation/Prose statement

Example of an input/UR

Output

/i/ insertion (called ‘‘Vowel Insertion’’ by Kreidler (1989: 141– 144))

/i/ is inserted between a stem ending with /t/, and /d/ and a following -ed form on the one hand and between a stem ending with a sibilant and a following plural, possessive and third person singular morpheme on the other hand.

wantØd addØd practisØs

want[i]d add[i]d practis[i]s

Velar softening

In the environment of a following high front vowel in derived words // changes to [d‰] and /k/ to [s].

pedago[]y electri[k]ity

pedago[d‰]y electri[s]ity

Vowel reduction

Vowels generally become weak in unstressed syllables.

Afric[æ]n lab[½]r

Afric[]n lab[]r

Yod-deletion

Yod- is deleted after palatals, /r/ and Cl clusters.

[d‰ju:] Jew [rju:]mour [klju:] clue

[d‰u:] [ru:]mour [klu:]

z-Devoicing

Notwithstanding intervocalic voicing, the alveolar fricative is devoiced before the prefixes –is and –ive.

cri[z]is plo[z]ive

cri[s]is plo[s]ive

83

4. The AB axis The AB axis represents the establishment in each New English of a sound system parallel to that of old accents, RP, for example. In other words, a sound B develops in each new variety of English to correspond to each RP segment A; B may be identical to A or di¤erent from it. The arrow sign (!) used in the formulation of the AB axis may be misleading if understood in the strict generative sense as ‘‘becomes’’ or ‘‘is realized as’’, since it is debatable whether A can be perceived as the input to B. In the perspective of the autonomy of New Englishes, this paper argues for the emergence of the B sound system of a variety of English many of whose present speakers have never been in contact with the A sound system.

84

Augustin Simo Bobda

There is normally no hierarchy between the sound systems A and B. This view of the relationship between A and B corresponds to the view of Wells (1982), who thought it fair and practical to establish standard lexical sets to economically refer to given sounds of English and their variations, to avoid references like RP /˛:/, /½/, and so on. The NURSE vowel thus designates both RP /˛:/ and General American /˛r/ while the LOT vowel represents both RP /½/ and General American /þ/, as well as CamE //. (5) Correspondence between some RP and CamE sounds (source: Simo Bobda 1994) Monophthongs

Diphthongs

TH sounds

RP

CamE

RP

CamE

RP

CamE

i:, i

i

ei





t

u:, 

u

ai

þi

¶

d



, e

i

i

æ, þ:

þ



o, 

½, , 



a

au

˛:

// or, our, ur // er, ear, ir, yr /a/ occasionally with er

i

i, i, i, ia, iu depending on spelling



/a, , u, / depending on spelling and other clues



, e



, u, ua, u

The correspondence between the RP sound system (representing A) and the CamE sound system (representing B) is roughly as shown in (5) for monophthongs, diphthongs and two consonants, // and /¶/.4

5. The BB’ axis The BB’ axis represents the phonological processes parallel to those of older and other Englishes that a¤ect B sounds as already seen in many of the examples above. A large number of BB’ phonological rules are similar, 4. See Simo Bobda (1994, 2005) for elaborate discussions.

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

85

or identical to the AA’ ones; this is what ensures resemblance between varieties of English and ensures membership within the English language family. The di¤erences between RP and, say CamE, stem from the fact that some RP rules do not apply in that variety, while others apply di¤erently, partially or more generally. Even more interestingly, di¤erences further derive from altogether new rules added to the grammar of English in a particular setting, Cameroon taken here as an example. Examples of rules that apply both in RP and CamE are /ai/-laxing, CClaxing, cluster assimilation, gliding, N-deletion, palatalisation, S-allomorphy, spirantisation and velar softening. RP rules not normally found in mainstream CamE include the L-allophonic rule, R-insertion, syllabic consonant formation and vowel reduction. RP rules that apply di¤erently in CamE include some types of assimilation, I-insertion, intervocalic Svoicing, pre-R breaking, yod deletion and Z-devoicing. RP rules that apply partially in CamE include final G-deletion and trisyllabic laxing. RP rules that apply more generally include Ks-voicing.5 Finally, the rules of CamE not found in classical RP, which are given a more extensive treatment here, include E-tensing, final devoicing, pre-ion devoicing and pre-yod deletion. E-tensing tenses // to [e] (a sound very close to Primary Cardinal No 2) in the environment of one and only one medial consonant as in [hevi, medikal, spe§ial] where RP normally has a mid-low front vowel very close to Primary Cardinal No 3. Final devoicing devoices obstruents in word-final position or before a word-final obstruent, as in [kat, bik, stif, t§es; diks, rpt] card, big, Steve, chase, digs, robbed. Pre-ion devoicing devoices an underlying /d/ or /z/ to /t/ and /s/, respectively, before a consonant followed by the su‰x –ion; /t/ then interacts with gliding, spirantisation and palatalisation to yield [§] as in conclu[§]on, divi[§]on, while /s/ interacts with gliding and palatalisation to also yield [§] as in conci[§]on, revi[§]on.6 Pre-yod deletion deletes /h/ before yod, as in [ juman, jumit, jum, jut§] human, humid, humour, huge. Pre-yod deletion is common among educated speakers in Britain, but forms generated by the rule are ‘‘judged to fall outside RP’’ (Wells 2000: xiii), and are marked with the special sign § in Wells’ (2000) Longman’s Pronunciation Dictionary.

5. See Simo Bobda (1994) for a more elaborate discussion of the various examples. 6. For a more elaboration discussion of the pre-ion devoicing rule, see Simo Bobda (1994: 226–227), Simo Bobda and Chumbow (1999: 128–132) and, for neighbouring Nigerian English, see Simo Bobda (2007b: 300–301).

86

Augustin Simo Bobda

6. Some TLP patterns It seems necessary at this point to recapitulate the meaning of the concept Trilateral Process, in order to enable a clearer reading of the illustrative patterns which follow. This recapitulation is done in (6). (6) The Trilateral Process (TLP) chart recapitulated

The example patterns include the following, drawn on Simo Bobda and Chumbow (1999). TLP 1 







Read: RP // is used unchanged as CamE UR. But while RP // weakens to [], its CamE counterpart does not undergo Vowel Reduction (VR) and surfaces unchanged as []. Sample derivation of the example word increment: Input increm[]nt ! increm[]nt (RP and CamE increm[]ntal )l VR increm[]nt ________ Output increm[]nt Other examples: president [¨przidnt] frequent (Adj.) [¨frikwnt]

increm[]nt

[¨presidnt] [¨frikwnt]

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

TLP 2 



i/



87

Read: RP // is used unchanged as CamE UR. But while RP // weakens to [i] or [], its CamE counterpart does not undergo Vowel Reduction (VR) and surfaces unchanged as []. Sample derivation of the example word tempest: Input temp[]st ! temp[]st VR temp[i/]st Output temp[i/]st

(RP and CamE temp[]stuous) ________ temp[]st

Other examples: prophet [¨pr½fit, -t]

[¨prft]

interest

[¨intrs(t)]

[¨intrist, -st]

TLP 3 

i/



e e

Read: // is used unchanged as CamE UR, and while // weakens to [i] in RP, CamE // changes to [e] (by -tensing) and surfaces as [e]. Sample derivation of the example word poetry: Input po[]try ! po[]try VR po[i]try -Tensing _______ Output po[i]try

(RP po[]tic, CamE po[]t) _______ po[e]try po[e]try

88

Augustin Simo Bobda

Other examples: tragedy [¨træd‰idi] molecule [¨m½likju:l]

[¨trad‰edi] [¨mlekul]

TLP 4 æ

a



a

Sample derivation of the example word African: Input Afric[æ]n ! Afric[a]n (note the change of UR here) (RP Afric[æ]nity, CamE – [a]nity) VR Afric[]n _______ Output Afric[]n Afric[a]n Other examples: [¨skla] scholar [¨sk½l] pathetic [¨ptik] [¨patetik] Note that // may be optionally or occasionally deleted and leave a syllabic consonant as in RP [fain†l, m½rl†] ( final, moral ) vs. CamE fainal, mral], where CamE retains its /a/. TLP 5 æ

a

i/

a

Sample derivation of the example word miracle: Input mir[æ]cle ! mir[a]cle (RP mir[æ]culous, CamE – [a]culous) VR mir[i/]cle ________ Output mir[i/]cle mir[a]cle

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

Other examples: character [¨kærikt] oracle [¨½rikl]

[¨karakta] [¨rakl]

TLP 6 þ:

a



a

Sample derivation of the example word particular: Input p[þ:]rticular ! p[a]rticular (RP p[þ:]rt, CamE p[a]rt) VR p[]rticular ________ Output p[]rticular p[a]rticular Other examples: anarchy [¨ænki] breakfast [¨brkfst]

[¨anaki] [¨brekfas(t)]

TLP 7 :







Sample derivation of the example word cupboard: Input cupb[:]rd ! cupb[]rd (RP b[:]rd and CamE b[]rd ) VR cupb[]rd ________ Output cupb[]rd cupb[]rd Other examples: forward [¨f:wd] installation [inst¨lei§n]

[¨fwt] [inst¨le§n]

89

90

Augustin Simo Bobda

TLP 8 

u



u

Sample derivation of the example word could (weak form): Input c[]ld ! c[u]ld (RP strong form c[]ld, CamE c[u]ld ) VR c[]d ____ Output c[]ld c[u]ld Other examples: would [wd] [wut] should [§d] [§ut] TLP 9 u:

u



u

Sample derivation of the example word tomorrow: Input t[u:]morrow ! t[u]morrow (RP [tu:] to and CamE [tu]) VR t[]morrow ________ Output t[]morrow t[u] morrow Other examples: today [t¨dei] tonight [t¨nait]

[¨tude] [tu¨nait]

TLP 10 ˛:







Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

Sample derivation of the example word liturgy: Input lit[˛:]rgy ! lit[]rgy (RP lit[˛:]rgical, CamE – []rgical ) VR lit[]rgy ______ Output lit[]rgy lit[]rgy Other examples: metallurgy [mi¨tæld‰i] murmur [¨m˛:m]

[me¨tald‰i] [¨mm]

TLP 11 ˛:







Sample derivation of the example word perfect (verb): Input p[˛:]rfect ! p[]rfect (RP p[˛:]rfect, and CamE p[]rfect ) VR p[]rfect ______ Output p[]rfect p[]rfect Other examples: commerce [¨k½ms] concert [¨k½nst]

[¨kms] [¨knst]

TLP 12 







Sample derivation of the example word surplus: Input surpl[]s ! surpl[]s (RP pl[]s, CamE pl[]s) VR surpl[]s ______ Output surpl[]s surpl[]s

91

92

Augustin Simo Bobda

Other examples: [sk¨ss] success [sk¨ss] courageous [k¨reid‰s] [k¨red‰s] TLP 13 ei

i/

e

e

Sample derivation of the example word preface: Input pref [ei]ce ! pref [e]ce (RP [feis], CamE [fes]) VR pref [i/]ce ______ Output pref [i/]ce pref [e]ce Other examples: doctorate [¨d½ktrit, - t] portrait [¨p:trit, - t] TLP 14 







[¨dktret] [¨ptret]

Sample derivation of the example word future: Input fu[t§] ! fu[t§] (RP fu[tj]rity, CamE –[tj]rity) VR fu[t§] _____ Output fu[t§] fu[t§] Other examples: failure [¨feili] [¨felj] pleasure [¨pl‰] [¨ple‰]

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

TLP 15 







93

Sample derivation of the example word photography: Input ph[]tography ! ph[]togr(RP ph[]to, CamE ph[]to) VR ph[]tography ________ Output ph[]tography ph[]tography Other examples: supposition [sp¨zi§n] momentous [m¨mnts] TLP 16 ¶

d

¶

t

[sp¨si§n] [m¨mnts]

Sample derivation of the example word with: Input wi[¶] ! wi[d] (RP wi[¶]in, CamE wi[d]in) Final Devoicing ____ wi[t] Output wi[¶] wi[t] Other examples: bathe [bei¶] [bet] clothe [kl¶] [klot] 7. Concluding evaluation A TLP-based approach to an explanation of the pronunciation features of New Englishes is helpful in that it highlights the autonomy of these Englishes, o¤ers an innovative and arguably more illuminating account, and allows for a better readability of di¤erences between World Englishes.

94

Augustin Simo Bobda

Autonomy is seen in the fact that each New English is shown to have its own sound system, its own set of rules (although many are shared with Inner Circle and the other Englishes) which yield its own set of outputs. Table (7) gives a vivid picture of this autonomy. It shows the correspondence between RP and CamE URs and surface forms (SFs), and rules whose application, non-application or di¤erent application are responsible for the di¤erence in the SFs. (7) Correspondence between RP and CamE underlying representations and surface forms RP

Rule(s) involved

CamE

Example word

UR

SF

Pronunciation

UR

SF

Pronunciation

visible

i

/i

vizbl, --

i

i

visibl

VR

useful



()

ju:sf()l

u

u

jusful

VR

african

æ



æfrikn

a

a

afrikan

VR

vineyard

þ



vinjd

a

a

vainjat

VR

labour

½



leib





leb

VR

perfect (verb)

˛:



pfkt





pefkt

VR, E-Tensing

purport

˛:



pp:t





ppt

VR

courageous





kreid‰s





kred‰s

VR

readable

ei



ri:dbl

e

e

ridebl

VR

advantage

ei

i

dvþntid‰

e

e

advantet§

VR

prophet



i/

pr½fi, -t





prft

VR

with

¶

¶

wi¶

d

t

wit

Final Devoicing

division

½

‰

½ivi‰()n

d!t (before –ion) ! s

§

divi§n

Pre-ion Devoicing

flexible

ks

ks

ks

ks

z

Ks-Voicing

human

hju:

hju:

hju:

hju

ju

Pre-yod Deletion

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

95

In the perspective proposed here, only the segments which are part of the sound system of a New English can be the input to a phonological process within this particular variety. For example, in the word with, the input to (CamE) final devoicing rule, which yields /t/ ([wit]) is /d/ instead of (RP) /¶/, which is not normally part of the mainstream consonant system of the language. On the basis of this proposal, it becomes clear that the charts (8a) and (8b) below, which hypothetically show, respectively, a CamE B’ derived from an RP A, and an RP A’ derived from a CamE B, do not represent accurate processes. (8a)

(8b) A

B

A

B

A’

B’

A’

B’

Let us consider, as a further illustration, a word like courageous: to account for the di¤erence between the [] of this word in CamE and RP [], for example, it will not su‰ce to say that vowel reduction does not apply in CamE. This may suggest that the two accents have the same input (and only vowel reduction makes the di¤erence). It is further necessary to point out the fact, shown in the foregoing analyses, that RP has an underlying // while CamE has an underlying //, there being a rule that converts the RP UR to the CamE UR. Evidence for the innovativeness of the TLP-based approach can be seen in the ways in which the di¤erence between the RP and CamE pronunciations of the underlined segments of the words submit, poetry and exclusion is captured: submit: RP [sbmit]; CamE [sbmit] Traditional account: RP // is replaced by //. TLP-based account: 1. RP UR // has as its equivalent // in CamE; 2. While RP // undergoes VR to surface as [], CamE //, which does not undergo VR, surfaces unchanged as []. poetry: RP [pitri, --]; CamE [poetry] Traditional account: RP // or /i/ is replaced by /e/. TLP-based account: 1. RP UR // is the same as in CamE; 2. While RP // undergoes VR to surface as [] or [i], the CamE UR // (which does not undergo VR) tenses to [e] by an autonomous CamE rule.

96

Augustin Simo Bobda

exclusion: RP [iksklu:‰()n]; CamE [ksklu§n] Traditional account: RP /‰/ is replaced by /§/. TLP-based account: 1. RP underlying /d/ (cp. exclude) changes to /z/ through spirantisation; and /z/ changes to /‰/ through palatalisation; 2. CamE underlying /d/ changes to /t/ through pre-ion devoicing; then /t/ spirantises to /s/ which, in turn, palatalises to [§]. A final illustration of the autonomy of New Englishes as shown by the present proposal, and of its innovativeness, validity and reliability, is o¤ered by the processes involving // in the pronunciations of singer as [siÐ] in RP and [siÐa] in CamE. The traditional account (e.g. Mbangwana 1987: 415, Jowitt 1991: 80) is that // is inserted in the RP realisation to yield the CamE pronunciation. If we take RP /siÐ/ to be the input to CamE [siÐa], given that [siÐ] derives from the underlying /siÐ # / (the # boundary being the condition for -deletion), we can capture the derivation of [siÐa], according to the traditional approach, as in (9a). (9a) siÐ # 

siÐ

siÐa

One of the oddities of this account is that, if we thus involve RP input /siÐ # / as the input to the CamE pronunciation, it would suggest that // is deleted from /siÐ # / and then later inserted in the same derivation. According to the TLP-based account submitted here, // is not inserted, but fails to be deleted, in a variety of English (CamE) that does not delete it in this environment. This account can be captured as in (9b). (9b) siÐ # 

siÐ#a

siÐa A reading of accents of English world-wide through the prism of the TLP shows that their di¤erences stem either from their patterns of localisation of the sound system of English (the AB axis) or the phonological rules that apply in each accent (BB’), or both. For example, although East African English resembles many other English accents in its lack of

Reading Cameroon English phonology through the Trilateral Process

97

vowel reduction, it is still distinctive, for instance, from West African English, for its mid-high back rounded [o] which substitutes for the LOT vowel in [pailot] pilot, where West Africans would have a mid-low [] ([pailt]). Similarly, East Africans pronounce courageous as c[a]rageous for West African c[]rageous, the unreduced input in East Africa being the STRUT vowel, which is /a/ there and // in West Africa. In addition to work on sound systems, it would be useful to identify the BB rules which apply in each accent of English. This work has been started on Nigerian English (Simo Bobda 2007b) and arguably yields much more than would yield a surface-to-surface comparison of RP and Nigerian English features.

References Bailey, Richard W. and Manfred Go¨rlach (eds.). 1982. English as a World Language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row. Harris, John. 1996. On the trace of short ‘u’. English World-Wide 17(1): 1–40. Jowitt, David. 1991. Nigerian English Usage: An Introduction. Lagos: Longman. Kachru, Braj B. 1985. Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In: Quirk, Randolph and Henry Widdowson (eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 11–30. Kouega, Jean Paul. 1991. Some Speech Characteristics of Cameroon Media Newscasts: An Exploratory Analysis of Media and Television News Texts. Unpublished Doctorat de Troisie`me Cycle thesis, University of Yaounde. Kreidler, Charles W. 1989. The Pronunciation of English. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Lass, Roger. 1984. Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Masanga, David W. 1983. The Spoken English of Educated Moghamo People: A Phonological Study. Unpublished Doctorat de Troisie`me Cycle thesis. University of Yaounde. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1987. Some characteristics of sound patterns of Cameroon Standard English. Multilingua 6(4): 411–424. Rubach, Jerzy. 1984. Segmental rules of English and cyclic phonology. Language 20(1): 21–54. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994. Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Bern: Peter Lang. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2000. Explicating the features of African English pronunciation: Some steps further. Zeitschrift fu¨r Anglistik und Afrikanistik 48(2): 123–136.

98

Augustin Simo Bobda

Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2005. Cameroon English phonology. In: Kortmann, Bernd, Edgar W. Schneider, Kate Burridge and Clive Upton (eds.), A Handbook of Varieties of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 885–901. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2007a. Patterns of segment sequence simplification in some African Englishes. World Englishes 26(4): 411–423. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 2007b. Some segmental rules in Nigerian English phonology. English World-Wide 28(3): 279–310. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Beban Sammy Chumbow. 1999. The trilateral process in Cameroon English phonology. English World-Wide 20(1): 35–65. Todd, Loreto. 1982. The English language in West Africa. In: Bailey and Go¨rlach (eds.), pp. 281–305. Wells, John C. 1982. Accents of English. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, John C. 2000. Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. New Edition. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.

Chapter 5 One variety, di¤erent ethnic tongues: A phonological perspective on Nso’ English Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy 1. Introduction The spread of English across borders has been closely associated with British colonial activities between the 15th and the 20th centuries (see Bauer 1994, Leith 1996, and Crystal 2004). Added to this are globalisation and the prominence since the mid-20th century of the United States of America on the world’s economic, audio-visual, military and diplomatic stage. Today, the English language is spoken by many people in di¤erent parts of the world, and as some chapters in this volume illustrate, English is now progressively being used as L1 or mother tongue in Cameroon, as well as in other postcolonial communities. Swann (1996) cites more than 60 countries that have taken English for di¤erent national and international purposes, e.g. as preferred foreign language in education, language of international trade, and medium of transaction for multinational corporations. Kachru (1982, 1992) mapped the spread of English into three concentric circles: Inner, Outer, and Expanding Circles, which represent the status of English and its speakers around the world. As more and more people speak English, each region gives it its own local colour, representing in it its geographical, linguistic, and social ecologies. This has resulted in distinct varieties of the language, generally referred to as New Englishes, Non-native Englishes, Postcolonial Englishes, Nativised Englishes, Indigenised varieties of English (see Bamgbose et al. 1995, Crystal 1999, McArthur 2004, Schneider 2007, Roberts and Canagarajah 2009), emerging in these areas – most of them today spoken as first language. The fact that non-native and/or New Englishes speakers now outnumber native speakers shows that there certainly will be increased acculturation of the language in these new settings. What this implies is loss of ownership of the language by its original native speakers and the acquisition of ownership of respective varieties by their new speakers. The case of Cameroon, with its linguistic, ethnic and sociocultural diversity, is particularly interesting and has been analysed from various perspectives by

100

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

researchers at di¤erent periods in time, for instance, Mbassi-Manga (1973) on the functions and status of English, Koenig et al. (1983) on sociolinguistic and multilingual (English, French, Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE), and indigenous languages) speaker profiles in urban centres, Simo Bobda (1994) on the phonology of Cameroon English (CamE), Wolf (2001) on historical and current trends in the functions and status of English, and Anchimbe (2006) on morphological and lexical processes in CamE. Focus in this chapter is on Nso’ English (Nso’E), one of the most stigmatised ethnic varieties or ethnolects of CamE. It is spoken by the Nso’ethnic group of the North-West Region of the country. Considering that regions in which New Englishes are spoken are predominantly multilingual and multiethnic in nature, there is bound to be ethnolinguistic variability even within national varieties of New Englishes. Ethnic varieties display some intra-national distinctiveness which, though often socially stigmatised, provide a potential domain for linguistic research because they reflect the linguistic behaviour and patterns of sociolinguistic interaction of particular sectors of the speech community of the variety. And so using empirical phonological evidence, with focus on vocalic features, this chapter aims to analyse certain vowel change patterns that are recurrent in Nso’E and how these make it a legitimate ethnolect of mainstream CamE. The realisations of six vowels are investigated among two sets of respondents of Nso’ origin: primary school children representing the basilectal level and university undergraduates and graduates representing the acrolectal level. The vowels tested include the FACE, GOAT, GOOSE, DRESS, KIT, and lettER vowels (see section 4 below). Although the attitudinal aspect, i.e. people’s attitudes towards Nso’E, is not taken up in depth in this chapter, many Cameroonians would agree that they harbour a negative attitude towards ethnolects of CamE. Stigmatisation of ethnic varieties of English happens both within and outside the communities that speak them. The rest of the chapter is arranged as follows: section 2 revisits the double-faced status of English in Cameroon and the di¤erent motivations for learning or identifying with it. Section 3 provides an overview of some of the most noticeable ethnolects of CamE, namely Nso’E, Bafut English, Wimbum English, Kom English, Bakossi English, and Moghamo English. The aim is to establish the place of ethnic varieties in the norm of mainstream CamE. Section 4 is the case study, i.e. Nso’E, and includes the methodology, data, and analysis of the di¤erent vowels tested. This section is followed by the conclusion.

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

101

2. The double-faced status of English in Cameroon In all areas to which English spread and now exists as a postcolonial language, there have been divided attitudes towards it. While some people praise it as the language of education, employment and upward social mobility, others curse it for introducing social strata into society. This dilemma is also present in Cameroon and with even an additional twist. This twist resides in the bilingual nature of the country, with French and English as o‰cial languages. Having emerged strongly in the 2000s as a marker of social status, especially as L1 for anglophone children in urban areas (see Alobwede 1998), and as a language of global economic opportunities for francophones (see Anchimbe 2007, Fonyuy 2010), English continues to be identified with the educated class and the upward moving middle class. From these two standpoints, English is positively regarded as the language of the future and as a solution to the slow economic progress in Cameroon. On the other hand, given that access to English is not guaranteed for everyone and that ethnic accents make variation in the language very visible, stigmas and stereotypes have emerged, and have caused sociolinguistic divisions that place certain speakers of the language lower than others. This happens at two levels: 1) between francophones and anglophones, and 2) between the mainstream speakers of CamE and speakers of stigmatised ethnic varieties. On the first level, as Anchimbe (2007) explains, the francophones now consider their variety of English more authentic and international than the anglophones’ which they claim is highly influenced by CPE. And on the second level, as earlier noted by Fonyuy (2005), certain ethnic groups have become stigmatised because of the distinctive phonological realisations recurrent in their English. Among these are the Nso’, the Kom, the Bafut, the Bakossi, the Moghamo, and the Wimbum ethnic communities. The major phonological features of these ethnic varieties are presented in section 3 below, and although attitudes towards these ethnic varieties are social, they play into the spread of these ethnolects and a¤ect their speakers in various ways including: their selection of phonological features, choice of language in specific contexts, and the need to speak a neutral or non-ethnic accent. The double-faced nature of English is highlighted as it simultaneously serves as a tool of economic empowerment to some of its speakers and of social division and exclusion for others. This aspect therefore, exposes allegiances to the English language by di¤erent groups of Cameroonians

102

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

motivated by di¤erent reasons. Nso’E, the focus of this chapter, and its speakers are caught in this dilemma. As they use English for education, administration and employment, they are regularly reminded that their accent is not socially acceptable because, as shown below, they pronounce several RP and CamE vowel phonemes in a predominantly Lamnso’influenced style. This reminder falls under what Anchimbe (chapter 6, this volume) refers to as attitudinal filtration, i.e. speakers’ attitudes towards the speech forms of other speakers may force these speakers to abandon the ethnic features for the mainstream features identified with the larger CamE-speaking speech community. Interestingly, although this normally happens at individual level, here in the case of Nso’E, it is directed at an entire ethnic group and its ethnic-based accent of English. Identifying speech patterns with ethnic groups is not limited to Cameroon or postcolonial communities alone but is also common in predominantly monolingual communities with high degrees of immigrant populations. Feagin (2002: 29), for instance, concludes after an investigation of African American and European American speech in the US that ‘‘ethnicity often provides a striking correlation with linguistic variation’’. See also Labov (1966) and Alim and Baugh (2007) on African American Vernacular English and more.

3. Ethnolects of CamE: One variety, di¤erent ethnic tongues In most postcolonial contexts, ethnic accents of English are identified after the distinct phonological characteristics of the ethnic group’s language. This notwithstanding, the language still is English, the reference accent is RP, and the (New English) variety is CamE; but the (ethnic) tongues that speak it are numerous and di¤erent. Let us have a brief look at some of these tongues. In Cameroon, one commonly hears of Banso’ Tongue or Banso’ English. Literally, this refers to the variety of English spoken by the Nso’ ethnic group. Nso’E is noted for its [u]full enunciation, predominantly realising RP [əʊ] and CamE [o] as [u]. For instance, the RP diphthong [əʊ] as in pr[əʊ]gramme, b[əʊ]l, g[əʊ]t, and [əʊ]ld (programme, bowl, goat, old) is simplified to the monophthong [u], yielding Nso’E pr[u]gramme, b[u]l, g[u]t, [u]ld. CamE rather has [o] in all these vowel positions. This phenomenon is most recurrent when the diphthong finds itself in closed syllables such as vowel-consonant (VC) or consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC)

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

103

structures as the examples above show. For more see Yusimbom (1992), Yuyun (1996), Sala (1999), and Fonyuy (2003). Diphthong simplification also occurs sparingly in open syllables of CV structures as in g[u] for RP g[əʊ] (go). However, there are also cases of CV structures where this [u] for [əʊ] phenomenon does not occur at all, such as in dough, know, low, and no. In these CV structures, RP [əʊ] and CamE [o] are rather replaced by, or monophthongised to, [ɔ], such that RP l[əʊ]w (low) and n[əʊ] (no) and CamE l[o]w and n[o] are realised in Nso’E as l[ɔ]w and n[ɔ] respectively. With such variation, i.e. [u] for [əʊ], [o] and [ɔ] for [əʊ], [o], it is di‰cult to say exactly where each is expected to occur. This is even made more di‰cult by some instances of free variation in which within the same word the two variants are realised, i.e. the same speaker may alternate between [u] for [əʊ] and [ɔ] for [əʊ] in the same words. It should, however, be noted that free variation is apparently higher for open syllables than closed ones. For instance, RP g[əʊ] (go) can be realised in Nso’E as g[u] at one time and g[ɔ] at another time, but rarely as CamE g[o]. More of these distinctive vocalic realisations in Nso’E will be discussed in the case study (section 4) below. Another ethnic tongue of interest here is Bafut English. Bafut speakers of English generally replace CamE [i], and the RP short or long high front vowels [ɪ] as in m[ɪ]ster and [i:] as in sard[i:]ne, vasel[i:]ne, (mister, sardine, vaseline) by a high central vowel [ɬ] yielding m[ɬ]ster, sard[ɬ]ne, vasel[ɬ]ne. Also Bafut English speakers often do not make a distinction between the voiced and voiceless bilabial plosives [p, b]. Both are realised as the voiced counterpart [b], such that word pairs like Peter and bitter, pill and bill, pack and back become homophonous. However, this is currently less recurrent. The case of the Bakossi language, Akɔɔsɛ, with four dialect areas, namely Lower Bakossi, Upper Bakossi, Nninong, and Elung, is more complex. Although, generally, Bakossi speakers have a drawl English speech, these four dialect areas display distinct dialectal features that make their realisation of CamE and RP sounds also distinct. For instance, Elung speakers do not generally distinguish between the voiceless and voiced a¤ricates [tʃ ] and [ʤ] when speaking English. So, the first segments of the words ‘church’ and ‘judge’ are realised as homophones, [tʃ]urch and [tʃ]udge. It should be noted that consonant devoicing is a common aspect of CamE pronunciation but the devoicing of the a¤ricate [ʤ] to [tʃ ] hardly occurs in CamE, especially not at word initial position. It is, therefore, a specificity of Bakossi speakers of English.

104

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

In Wimbum English, diphthong simplification is recurrent as in the following words: The RP diphthong [eɪ] in or[eɪ]nges, t[eɪ]ble, pr[eɪ]se (oranges, table, praise) is simplified to [ɛ] to yield or[ɛ]nges, t[ɛ]ble, pr[ɛ]se, but not to CamE or[e]nges, t[e]ble, and pr[e]se. It is also observable that Wimbum and Nso’ use the vowel [ɛ] in place of RP [eɪ], and also in place of CamE [e]. For instance, RP d[eɪ]nger, p[eɪ]y, pl[eɪ]y, r[eɪ]n, s[eɪ]y, s[eɪ]l, s[eɪ]le, t[eɪ]le, t[eɪ]l, (danger, pay, play, rain, say, sail, sale, tale, tail) are produced by speakers of Wimbum and Nso’ Englishes as d[ɛ]nger, p[ɛ]y, pl[ɛ]y, r[ɛ]in, s[ɛ]y, s[ɛ]il, s[ɛ]le, t[ɛ]le, t[ɛ]il. It should be pointed out that this phonological restructuring is also di¤erent from CamE d[e]nger, p[e]y, pl[e]y, r[e]in, s[e]y, s[e]il, s[e]le, t[e]le, t[e]il. In spite of this shared feature, the high frequency of Nso’E [i] for RP [eɪ] between nasals rarely occurs in Wimbum English. For more on Wimbum English see Tamfu (1989). Also of interest here is Kom English with its characteristic vowel epenthesis phenomenon whereby [i] is inserted after RP [æ] and [ɔ:] in certain words. The most commonly quoted example involves the compound word landlord. Speakers of Kom English restructure the RP monophthongs [æ] and [ɔ] to the diphthongs [ai] and [ɔi]. RP l[æ]ndl[ɔ:]d (landlord) is therefore realised in Kom English as l[ai]ndl[ɔi]d. This realisation is distinct from CamE l[a]ndl[ɔ]d. Apart from this feature, Kom English, like Wimbum English, also shares the distinctive [u] for [əʊ] phenomenon in Nso’E. For instance, RP pr[əʊ]gramme and CamE pr[o]gramme are also commonly realised by these speakers as pr[u]gramme. One possible reason why these speakers share a common pronunciation feature could be that Kom and Lamnso’ share a common linguistic genealogy; they belong to the family of languages referred to as the Ring Languages spoken along the ring road in the North West Region of Cameroon. For more on Kom English, see Song (1996). In Moghamo English, one witnesses realisations with reduced vowels þ non-syllabic consonants. In RP such realisations do not have a syllabic consonant as in slow but in Moghamo an epenthetic vowel is inserted as in s[ə]low. According to Masanga (1983), educated Moghamo English characteristically inserts a vowel within certain consonant clusters. For example, in the word quickly, Moghamo English inserts an epenthetic [i] in the consonant cluster [kl], hence realising quickly as quick[i]ly, school as s[u]chool. Such realisations suggest that Moghamo has an open syllable system and so avoids consonant clusters, replacing them by epenthetic vowels in order to create a familiar CV structure (see Masanga 1983).

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

105

The features identified above are among the most distinctive phonological elements of the Nso’, Bafut, Kom, Wimbum, Bakossi and Moghamo ethnic varieties of CamE. However, there are other features that are shared by many ethnolects – most of these are also found in CamE. The more similar the sounds of an ethnic variety are to CamE sounds, the less the stigma on it. This is because such a variety would not stand out distinctively from the mainstream communal variety. Some of these general features of CamE have been described in Simo Bobda (1994). Focus on the next sections is on Nso’E, the case study selected for this chapter.

4. Case study: Nso’ English According to SIL (1987) and Lewis (2009) Lamnso’ is spoken by about 125,000 people in Kumbo and Jakiri Sub-divisions, Bui Division of the North West Region of Cameroon. It is classified as a Niger-Congo, Atlantic-Congo, Bantoid, Bantu, Southern, Grassfields, Ring language. Its contact with English could be traced back to the 1920s when East Anglian Catholic missionaries settled in the area and opened schools. They were later joined by missionaries from South Tyrol who in 1935 founded a hospital. The St. Elizabeth Catholic General Hospital still exists today and is situated in Shisong, Kumbo Town. It is run by the Tertiary Sisters of St. Francis. This contact with English and the fact that the language had many contexts in which it was used, e.g. in missionary schools and the hospital, could be accountable for the spread of some Lamnso’-influenced phonological features which still exist in Nso’E today. 4.1. Data The data used in this chapter were collected in 2005 in four locations: Nso’, Buea, Bamenda and Yaounde. A total of 100 respondents were involved. To be able to trace the patterns of phonological features tested here, two lectal levels were targeted: the basilectal level comprising 50 pupils in primary 7 living and studying in Nso’, and the acrolectal level comprising 50 university undergraduates and graduates in Bamenda, Buea and Yaounde. All these respondents had Lamnso’as their L1. The data were collected using two methods: reading of a wordlist and casual interviews. Both were recorded. The respondents were presented a wordlist consisting of the following five words with target sounds characteristic of Nso’E: remember [ɛ], women [ɪ], gold [əʊ], move [u:], and maintain

106

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

Table 1. Casual interview questions Question No.

Questions/Answers at sentence level

Target word

Target sound

Q1(Both) A

What is your name? My name is . . .

name

[eɪ]

Q2 (Basilectal)1 A Q2 (Acrolectal) A

How old are you? I am . . . years old When will you be one more year old? I will be . . . year old in . . .

old

[əʊ]

Q3 (Basilectal) A Q3 (Acrolectal) A

In what class are you? I am in class seven How long does it take to complete secondary and high school? It takes seven years . . .

seven

[ɛ]

Q4 (Both) A

When are you in your best mood? I am in my best mood . . .

mood

[u:]

Q5 (Both) A

Name one school necessity One school necessity is . . .

necessity

[ə]

[eɪ]. The interviews comprised five casual questions, demanding answers at sentence level. As Table 1 shows, most of the sounds targeted by the wordlist were again sought for, but in di¤erent words. The aim of testing the same sounds in the two methods was to see if context (formal vs. informal) played a role in the choice of phonetic variants. As the case may be, several significant di¤erences were found.

5. Analysis and findings After listening to the wordlists and interviews and checking the respondents’ pronunciation against the target Nso’E sounds, CamE sounds and RP sounds, several interesting findings were arrived at. Worthy of note here is that, in spite of a few novelties, most of the core features identified 1. It should be clarified that in order not to hurt the feelings of some acrolectal informants, Questions 2 and 3 were restructured, but maintaining the discrete words and target phonemes.

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

107

with Nso’E by Yuyun (1996), Sala (1999) and Fonyuy (2003) could still be traced in the speech of acrolectal speakers. This is very important for further description of Nso’E as an ethnolect of CamE. In the analysis of the data, I have used terminology proposed by Wells (1982: 129¤ ) in his concept of ‘‘Standard Lexical Sets’’. Here, key words in which specific vowels are conspicuous are used to label these vowels. I have, therefore, used the following: FACE vowel for the RP diphthong [eɪ], GOAT vowel for the RP diphthong [əʊ], DRESS vowel for RP [ɛ], GOOSE vowel for RP [u:], KIT vowel for RP [ɪ] and LettER vowel for RP [ə]. Several of the processes identified are described with the help of frequency statistics in the next sub-sections. These include FACE vowel simplification, GOAT vowel substitution, DRESS vowel lowering, GOOSE vowel substitution, and the preference for full rather than reduced vowels as in KIT and lettER. 5.1. FACE vowel simplification At the basilectal level there is the simplification of RP diphthongs to monophthongs in Nso’E, where 74% of the informants simplify [eɪ] to [i] in name (interviews – Int) and 92% in maintain (wordlist reading – WL). Although simplification is a general tendency in CamE, these realisations are specific to Nso’E. This vocalic process is recurrent in Nso’E especially between nasals (e.g. name, maintain) and in nasal-vowel-consonant environments such as maid, make, naked. As Table 2 illustrates, CamE rather prefers to simplify RP [eɪ] to [e] (4%). Note that the [eɪ] in words such as play, paint, same, tale, came is not restructured to [i] in Nso’E; rather it is either simplified to Nso’E [ɛ], or CamE [e], because RP [eɪ] in these cases does not occur between, or after nasals. At the acrolectal level, the [i] for [eɪ] simplification is significantly reduced. It is realised by only 4% of the 50 acrolectal respondents in the interviews and 36% in the wordlist reading. As further seen in Table 2, the dominant realisation is rather the fossilisation of CamE [e] for RP [eɪ] as seen in 80% for name (Int), and 48% for maintain (WL). Although the respondents are linguistically critical users, the Nso’E [i] for [eɪ] trait scores 36% in the realisation of maintain in the wordlist task. This also indicates that the [i] for [eɪ] phenomenon occurs more between nasals that are followed by a consonant than when the nasal is at the end of the word.

108

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

Table 2. Relative scores for the FACE vowel Lectal level

Words

name

Acrolect (Int)

name

Basilect (WL)

maintain

[eɪ]

[eɪ]

Acrolect maintain (WL)

CamE

Nso’E

Sound Freq % Sound Freq % [eɪ]

Basilect (Int)

Total

RP

[eɪ]

–

4

–

4

8

–

8

–

8

4

[e]

[e]

[e]

[e]

2

40

–

24

66

4

80

–

48

33

Sound Freq % [i]

37

74

[ɛ]

11

22

[ɛ]

4

8

[i]

2

4

[i]

46

92

[ɛ]

4

8

[i]

18

36

[ɛ]

4

8

126

100

The 36% recurrence is relatively high among the advanced or acrolectal speakers, and on the basis of this, we could consider it a legitimate feature of the Nso’ ethnic variety of CamE. This is because the feature survives both prescriptive instructions on its ‘‘correct’’ RP pronunciation in the speakers’ years of education and the negative attitudes attached to it by the CamE-speaking community. 5.2. The GOAT vowel substitution Another feature recurrent in the data is the substitution of RP [əʊ] and CamE [o] by Nso’E [u]. The two words used to test this, it is recalled, are old (Int) and gold (WL). At the basilectal level, there is a high frequency of Nso’E [u] for RP [əʊ] as seen in 94% for old and 98% for gold (Table 3). The CamE variant [o] for RP [əʊ] scores only 4%. Although this may hamper intelligibility in some situations with common homophones, it is also an indication of what Kean (1986) calls a transfer to somewhere. Here the L2 sounds having no counterpart in L1 may be di‰cult to learn, while L2 structures highly congruent with those in L1 are acquired more easily. For this reason, there is the simplification of diphthongs at the target or end point. The high frequency of Nso’E [u] for RP [əʊ] could also be for the following reasons:

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

109

– [u] is a shared feature in both Lamnso’ and English phonetic systems – the diphthong [əʊ] is not found in Lamnso’ – [u] requires less articulation e¤ort than RP [əʊ] because [u] is not a diphthong. – it could also be speculated that the [u] recurrent in German, and Dutch pronounced as [u] were possibly passed on to the evangelised Nso’ community in the 1900s by the German and Dutch missionaries. The first German-speaking missionaries there belonged to the society of the Sacred Heart Fathers (SCJ ¼ Societas Cordis Jesu), and the Mill Hill Fathers from Holland, the Netherlands (see Fr. Stukart’s Memories). Table 3. Relative scores for the GOAT vowel RP

CamE

Nso’E

Lectal level

Words Sound Freq %

Sound Freq %

Sound Freq %

Basilect (Int)

old

[əʊ]

–

–

[o]

3

6

[u]

47

94

Acrolect (Int)

old

[əʊ]

3

6

[o]

37

74

[u]

10

20

Basilect (WL)

gold

[əʊ]

–

–

[o]

1

2

[u]

49

98

Acrolect (WL) gold

[əʊ]

6

12

[o]

26

52

[u]

18

36

67

33.5

124

62

Total

9

4.5

At the acrolectal level, the Nso’E [u] for CamE [o] and RP [əʊ] reduces but persists as seen in a 20% realisation in old (Int) and 36% in gold (WL). However, the predominant pronunciation here is CamE [o] for RP [əʊ] as shown by 74% (Int) and 52% (WL) realisations in Table 3. With as many as 20% (Int) and 36% (WL) of acrolectal speakers out of the 100 respondents realising the Nso’E feature, we could also conclude that it has significant chances of establishing itself as a stable element of this ethnolect. This is more evident if we take into account the realisations of basilectal speakers along with the acrolectal speakers. Together, these sum up, as Table 7 shows, on average to 62% for the Nso’E [u] for RP [əʊ] and CamE [o] substitution phenomenon. 5.3. The DRESS vowel split The DRESS vowel undergoes two distinct split processes in Nso’E in the data, raising and lowering; both are at the basilectal level. In some words

110

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

it is realised as [a] (lowering) and in others as [i] (raising). An instance of [ɛ] vowel lowering is manifested at the basilectal level where 84% of Nso’E speakers lower RP [ɛ] to Nso’E [a], realising seven as s[a]ven (Table 4). This, however, does not occur in other words such as select, second, and lesson, which have a similar phonotactic pattern as seven. Such a realisation suggests assimilation in the environment of the voiced fricative [v], and the presence of the nasal in the final syllable of seven, both of which facilitate the vowel lowering process. This becomes clearer if we consider that in Nso’E, vowel lowering mostly occurs in the environment of nasals. Note also that for the first time basilectal Nso’E realises the phoneme [ɛ] in the same way as RP and CamE. The fact that only 4% (see Table 4) of acrolectal speakers (Int) realise Nso’E [a] for CamE and RP [ɛ] singles out this feature as a lectal idiosyncrasy. It could, therefore, be considered as one-o¤. Table 4. Relative scores for the DRESS vowel RP

CamE

Nso’E

Lectal level

Words

Sound Freq %

Sound Freq % Sound Freq %

Basilect (Int)

seven

[ɛ]

8

16

–

–

– [a]

42

84

Acrolect (Int)

seven

[ɛ]

48

96

–

–

– [a]

2

4

Basilect (WL) remember [ɛ]

4

8

–

–

– [i]

46

92

Acrolect (WL) remember [ɛ]

39

78

–

–

– [i ]

11

22

Total

99

49.5

101

50.5

An instance of vowel raising is seen in 92% of Nso’E [i] for CamE and RP [ɛ] at the basilectal level where rem[ɛ]mber is realised as rem[i]mber (Table 4). Although Nso’E [i] for [ɛ] diminishes significantly in acrolectal speech with a 22% realisation, this feature is timidly retained, but as mentioned above, this is significant enough to consider it a stabilising feature of the variety. This could be used to substantiate the adaptation of rules in Nso’E phonology, one of them being the alternation of [i] and [ɛ] between and after nasals. 5.4. The GOOSE vowel substitution The RP phoneme [u:], and CamE [u] undergo uncommon modifications in Nso’E. At the basilectal level, there is the general tendency for Nso’E to

111

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

substitute [ɔ] for CamE [u] and RP [u:] as seen in the 82% realisation of mood as m[ɔ]d at the basilectal level (Table 5). Curiously, the characteristic ‘‘[u]-fullness’’ of Nso’E is significantly reduced here. Nso’E can barely produce CamE [u] in mood and move with 12% (Int) and 4% (WL) respectively, especially if we consider that Lamnso’ and CamE [u] di¤er from RP [u:] only in length. One reason could be that the voiced nasal quality of the bilabial nasal [m] in these two words is co-articulated with that of [u:], yielding [ɔ] which is more sonorant, and is produced with less stricture than [u:] and [u]. This process is an indication that Nso’E has a phonological norm, where [u] and [u:] ! [ɔ] after the bilabial nasal [m] as in moon and move. This rule also proves that the sequence Nasal þ Vowel is not permissible in Lamnso’ if the vowel space is filled by [u] to realise [mu] and even [nu], [ ɲu] [ɳu] (see Sala 1999). Although [ɔ] is not in the Lamnso’ phonetic inventory, [ɔ] and [o] sometimes exhibit free variation in initial non-nasal Lamnso’ words such as k[o] / k[ɔ] (to take); f[o] / f[ɔ] (to give); l[o]n / l[ɔ]n (to beg); and k[o]ng / k[ɔ]ng (to like / love). This recurrence of free variation seems to have been transferred to Nso’E. Table 5. Relative scores for the GOOSE vowel RP

CamE

Nso’E Sound Freq %

Lectal level

Words Sound Freq %

Sound Freq %

Basilect (Int)

mood

[u]

[u:]

–

–

6

12 [ɔ]

41

82

[o]

3

06

Acrolect (Int)

mood

[u:]

4

8

[u]

30

60 [ɔ]

16

32

Basilect (WL)

move

[u:]

–

–

[u]

2

4 [ɔ]

48

96

Acrolect (WL) move

[u:]

8

16 [u]

8

16 [ɔ]

34

68

12

6

142

71

Total

46

23

Even though the acrolectal speakers endeavour to ‘tame the stray goose’ with a CamE [u] realisation of 60% and 16% in mood and move; and an RP [u:] of 8% and 16% respectively, the [ɔ] for [u] trend is significantly retained. This can be seen in a 32% realisation in mood and 68% in move (Table 5). This adds another stabilised phonological feature to Nso’E norm and further establishes that there is the tendency to lower a vowel in the environment of a nasal-consonant to attain a more open vowel quality.

112

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

Table 6. Relative scores for KIT and LettER vowels Lectal level

Words

RP

CamE

Nso’E

Sound Freq %

Sound Freq % Sound Freq %

Basilect (Int)

necessity [ə]

–

–

[ɛ]

5

10 [i]

45

90

Acrolect (Int)

necessity [ə]

7

14 [ɛ]

16

32 [i]

27

54

Basilect (WL)

women

[ɪ]

–

–

[ɛ]

4

8 [i]

46

92

Acrolect (WL) women

[ɪ]

4

8

[ɛ]

29

58 [i]

17

34

11

5.5

54

27

Total

135

67.5

5.5. KIT and LettER In Nso’E, just as in CamE, there is the general tendency to realise full vowels in the place of reduced vowels. The basilectal speakers manifest a case of close substitution here with a 92% realisation of Nso’E [i] in women, which is nearer RP [ɪ] in quality, but distant from CamE [ɛ]. As Table 7 illustrates, in spite of this close substitution, the 90% Nso’E [i] in necessity is distant from both CamE [ɛ] and RP [ə]. In acrolectal speech, Table 7. Average scores for RP, CamE, and Nso’E variables RP n[eɪ]m

m[eɪ]ntain

%

CamE

%

4

n[e]m m[e]ntain

33

n[i]m

m[i]ntain 51.5

–

n[ɛ]m

–

–

–

4.5

[o]ld

[əʊ]ld

g[əʊ]ld

s[ɛ]ven

rem[ɛ]mber 49.5 –

m[u:]d

m[u:]ve

6

– g[o]ld

33.5 [u]ld

[ɛ] is a shared feature of RP & CamE m[u]d

m[u]ve

Nso’E

23

–

s[a]ven

%

11.5

g[u]ld

62

–

22

rem[i]mber –

28.5

m[ɔ]d

69.5

m[ɔ]ve

m[o]d

1.5

n[ə]cessity

7

n[ɛ]cessity

21

n[i]cessity

–

72

wom[ɪ]n

4

wom[ɛ]n

33

wom[i]n

–

63

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

113

58% of CamE [ɛ] for RP [ɪ] in women is dominant, but 54% Nso’E [i] for both CamE [ɛ] and RP [ə] persists in necessity (Table 7). Although this case shows that both Nso’E and CamE have the tendency to realise full vowels [i, ɛ] rather than reduced ones [ɪ, ə], it is likely here that Nso’E has added this specific feature to its phonology. This could be an adaptation rule where [ɪ] and [ə] become [i] after a nasal. The leading voiced nasal quality and the following voiced vowel quality are co-articulated: þ nasal followed by a front vowel; þ central; B mid-font; B high-front ! [i]. Again, with as high as 54% (Int) and 34% (WL) of acrolectal users realising RP [ə] and CamE [ɛ] as [i] in necessity, and RP [ɪ] and CamE [ɛ] also as [i] in women respectively, this phenomenon could be said to be stable. Since this process recurs in Nso’E, it could be said to be part of its phonological norm.

6. Conclusion2 Using empirical and phonological evidence from the data analysed above, this chapter establishes the following vocalic processes as stable or stabilising features of Nso’E. Although the exact environments of their realisations may still not be uniform, they occur in certain words and to significant degrees, at least in the data. – – – –

[i] for RP [eɪ], [ɛ], [ə], [ɪ]; and CamE [e], [ɛ] [u] for RP [əʊ]; and CamE [o] [ɔ] for RP [u:]; and CamE [u] [a] for RP and CamE [ɛ]

Even though the acrolectal speech tested here sometimes tends to fossilise in CamE, and in some cases approximate RP, the phonological traits of Nso’E still remain visible, reaching in some cases 20% realisations among the acrolectal respondents. Phonological processes such as vowel split through raising and lowering, alternation, simplification, substitution and adaptation, and full vowels for reduced vowels occur both in Nso’E and CamE, but the features tested above that undergo these processes are specifically those of Nso’E speakers. In spite of the fact that some of these phenomena are reduced in acrolectal speech, they are not completely eliminated, as they are still retained in Nso’E albeit to varying degrees.

2. I wish to thank an anonymous reviewer for comments on this chapter.

114

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

The average percentages for both basilectal and acrolectal realisations of the sounds tested in this study (see Table 7) reveal that almost all phonological processes, except s[a]ven for s[ɛ]ven with 22%, score at least 50% in Nso’E. While prescriptive corrections along the educational ladder may reduce the frequency of many of these features, they are not altogether eliminated. These retained features of Nso’E may in some cases create intelligibility hitches, especially at the international level. It should, nonetheless, be acknowledged that ethnic accents can neither be homogenised nor can they be completely extinct. This lack of homogenisation could be explained by Wells’ (1982) notion of free variation, which holds that variations in accents could be caused by constraints in the learning processes. Similarly, Weisser (2001: 157) says, even in the case of native speakers, free variation ‘‘is yet another indicator of the fact that it is not easy to determine for native speakers, either, whether to produce a reduced vowel or not and that there may be an element of choice’’ (see also Antilla 2002). From this observation, one can conclude that despite the norms for English pronunciation, there are considerable reasons and choices for variation, and free variation in certain Nso’E vocalic productions could well just be speakers’ choices that fossilise in the variety. Nso’E has, therefore, adopted phonological norms that are di¤erent from RP (considered the reference model) and CamE (which in reality is the input model for Nso’E speakers), making it a distinct variety of mainstream CamE.

References Alim, H. Samy and John Baugh (eds.). 2007. Talkin Black Talk: Language, Education, and Social Change. New York: Teachers College Press. Alobwede, D’Epie C. 1998. Banning Pidgin English in Cameroon? English Today 14(1): 54–60. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006. Cameroon English: Authenticity, Ecology and Evolution. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2007. Multilingualism, postcolonialism and linguistic identity: Towards a new vision of postcolonial spaces. In: Anchimbe, Eric A. (ed.), Linguistic Identity in Postcolonial Multilingual Spaces. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 1–22. Antilla, Arto. 2002. Variation and phonological theory. In: Chambers, Jack et al. (eds.), pp. 206–243. Bamgbose, Ayo, Ayo Banjo and Andrew Thomas (eds.). 1995. New Englishes: A West African Perspective. Ibadan: Mosuro Publishers.

A phonological perspective on Nso’ English

115

Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English Change. New York: Longman. Chambers, Jack K., Peter Trudgill and Nathalie Schilling-Estes (eds.). 2002. The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, David. 1999. The future of Englishes. English Today 15(2): 10–20. Crystal, David. 2004. The Language Revolution. Cambridge: Polity Press. Feagin, Crawford. 2002. Entering the community: Fieldwork. In: Chambers, Jack et al. (eds.), pp. 20–39. Fonyuy, Ernesta K. 2003. The Evolution of some Vowel Pronunciation Features in Lamnso’ Speakers’ English along the Educational Ladder. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde 1. Fonyuy, Ernesta K. 2005. The Evolution of some Regional Varieties of Cameroon English along the Educational Ladder. Unpublished DEA Dissertation, University of Yaounde 1. Fonyuy, Ernesta K. 2010. The rush for English education in urban Cameroon: Sociolinguistic implications and prospects. English Today 26(1): 32–40. Fr. Stukart’s Memories. n.d.. Mill Hill Fathers, Netherlands. Graddol, David, Dick Leith and Joan Swann. 1996. English: History, Diversity and Change. London: Routledge. Kachru, Braj B. 1982. Models for non-native Englishes. In: Kachru, Braj B. (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 31–57. Kachru, Braj B. 1992. Teaching World Englishes. In: Kachru, Braj B. (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. 2nd ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 355–366. Kean, Mary-Louise. 1986. Core issues in transfer. In: Kellerman, Eric and Michael S. Smith (eds.), Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon. 80–90. Koenig, Edna L., Emmanuel Chia and John Povey (eds.). 1983. A Sociolinguistic Profile of Urban Centres in Cameroon. Los Angeles: Crossroads Press. Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Leith, Dick. 1996. English – Colonial to postcolonial. In: Graddol, David et al. (eds.), pp. 180–212. Lewis, M. Paul (ed.). 2009. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. 16th ed. Dallas, Tex.: SIL International. http://www.ethnologue.com. Accessed 10 March 2009. Masanga, David. 1983. The Spoken English of Educated Moghamo People: A Phonological Study. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon: A Study of Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. McArthur, Tom. 2004. Is it world or international or global English, and does it matter? English Today 20(3): 3–15. Roberts, Paul and Suresh Canagarajah. 2009. Broadening the ELF paradigm: Spoken English in an international encounter. In: Sharifian, Farzad (ed.), English as an International Language: Perspectives and Pedagogical Issues. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 209–226.

116

Ernesta Kelen Fonyuy

Sala, Bonaventure M. 1999. Aspects of Lamnso’ Speakers’ English Pronunciation. Unpublished DIPES II Dissertation, ENS Yaounde, University of Yaounde I. Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SIL. 1987. Rapport du Se´minaire de Responsables des Comite´s des Langues Nationales du Cameroun Organise´ par la SIL a` Yaounde´ du 5 au 10 Janvier 1987. Yaounde, Cameroon: SIL. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994. Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Bern: Peter Lang. Swann, Joan. 1996. English voices. In: Graddol, David et al. (eds.), pp. 3–28. Song, Priscilla N. 1996. The Spoken English of some Educated Kom People: A Phonological Study. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde 1. Tamfu, Mushing W. 1989. The Spoken English of some Educated Wimbum People: A Study in Vowel Variation. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Weisser, Martin. 2001. A Corpus-based Methodology for Comparing and Evaluating Native and Non-native Speaker Accents. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Lancaster University. Wells, John C. 1982. Accents of English. 3 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Yusimbom, M. Z. 1992. The Oral English of some Educated Nso’ People. Unpublished Maıˆtrise Dissertation, University of Yaounde. Yuyun, Dzelambong T. 1996. The Influence of Mother Tongues on English Language Usage in Cameroon: A Case Study of Lamnso’. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Yaounde I.

Chapter 6 The filtration processes in Cameroon English Eric A. Anchimbe 1. Introdcution The metaphor of the ‘filtration processes’ was initially proposed in Anchimbe (2006) as an analytical framework for the evolution of Cameroon English (CamE) and, by extension, other New Englishes, postcolonial Englishes or indigenised varieties of English (IVEs). I am revisiting the framework here to throw more light on its functioning and to apply it on data collected in Cameroon in 2003.1 The aim is to illustrate that we are likely to learn more about the internal systems of these Englishes if we study them using analytical frameworks designed on the mix of their societal and linguistic structures rather than using ready-made theories based on older varieties of English and on contexts significantly di¤erent from these. With such a framework, integrated features would no longer be identified as deviant in CamE, as much previous research has done, but rather as specificities of the variety determined by the ecology in which it exists and the pressures put on it by its users. The framework, therefore, makes use of previous descriptions of processes of language contact and language borrowing, especially interference, replication, transfer and, code-switching, but rather considers them as emanating from a community of speakers who no longer treat English as a foreign or second language but as one of the languages in their multilingual repertoire. Their innovative use of the language, whether through borrowing or restructuring in various ways, is motivated and systematic and is not caused by inappropriate acquisition, substrate influence, second or foreign language learning, or negative transfer. One thing we have to bear in mind is that these postcolonial spaces were already multilingual before the introduction of English, so there was already a base for coping with many languages both at societal and individual levels. Also, to continue describing 1. The survey was conducted in three towns – Buea, Bamenda and Yaounde – using a questionnaire. In all, 300 respondents were involved: 150 youths (students, especially) and 150 adults. All respondents were Anglophones who had completed secondary school. The age range was between 17 and 70 years.

118

Eric A. Anchimbe

English in these countries as a second language when already it is used as a first language (see introduction) is less rewarding because it continues to tie the evolution of the language to patterns in acquisition and contact of languages and not to choices in language use. Though language contact phenomena are described in this chapter as contributing to the filtration model, they are not the ultimate factors in the evolution of CamE or other New Englishes. A few frameworks have been proposed lately in research on World Englishes that adopt similar points of view, among them Simo Bobda’s (1994a) theory of trilateral process, Mufwene’s (1996) competition and selection hypothesis, and, recently, Schneider’s (2007) dynamic model and Wolf and Polzenhagen’s (2009) cognitive sociolinguistics approach. Some of these models have been successfully applied to specific varieties of English with significant degrees of success, for instance, Simo Bobda and Chumbow (1999) and Anchimbe (2009) on CamE, Mufwene and Pargman (2003) on American English, Schneider (2008) on African Englishes, and Wolf (2008) on World Englishes.2 The common outcome of these studies is that features that had previously been discarded as negative transfer or mother-tongue influences on, and the impact of inaccurate acquisition of, English, may well have systematic explanations and stable patterns of emergence and evolution. They, from a general point of view, could be likened to processes in the so-called native or older Englishes. For instance, Schneider (2007) demonstrates that the fundamental evolutionary trajectory of American, Canadian, or Australian Englishes was not in any significant way di¤erent from that of Nigerian or Indian Englishes. In spite of the di¤erences in settlement patterns, which he elaborately describes, those varieties could still be plotted on stages of the dynamic model just as other later postcolonial Englishes. Mufwene (1996, 2001) also demonstrates this evolutionary commonality in the emergence and evolution of English-based Creoles. His hypothesis explains how features, especially of Creoles and Pidgins, are, metaphoricallyspeaking, deposited in a feature-pool in which they compete for places and are selected by speakers for communal communication. The aspect of

2. Wolf ’s chapter in this volume also applies the cognitive sociolinguistics approach to Cameroon English. In an earlier study (Wolf 2006), he uses the corpus of Cameroon English to illustrate how cognitive sociolinguistics can be incorporated to explain the choices of lexemes and meaning in religious discourse in Cameroon and other parts of West Africa.

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

119

competition proposed by Mufwene is partially applicable in the linguistic filtration process discussed below, though only for replacive elements, i.e. words that have existing counterparts in the language. Simo Bobda’s trilateral process (see chapter 4) is rooted in generative phonology and seeks to explain how ‘‘some features which surface as deviations in CamE are first of all underlyingly a result of restructuring of the native form’’ (Simo Bobda 1994a: 44). Anchimbe’s (2009: 83) postintegrational restructuring model is concerned with the predictability of the behaviour of new words entering a variety of the language, i.e., how they collocate with, influence or are influenced by, existing words or other new words in the system of the variety. The cognitive sociolinguistic framework proposed by Wolf and Polzenhagen (2009) (cf. chapter 3) describes the ways in which cultural conceptualisations in World Englishes are realised linguistically. It focuses on a hitherto less investigated issue in New Englishes research, i.e. the culture-language interface. One of the aims of this chapter, therefore, is to invite researchers and scholars of the IVEs to apply these frameworks or new ones more extensively in other varieties of English, so that more could be known of their internal structures.3 The notion of ‘filtration processes’ refers to a bi-functional, unconscious mechanism that filters speech patterns (attitudinal filtration) and linguistic forms (integrational filtration) in such a way that those features that eventually enter the norm of the language or variety are describable as belonging to its standard. The model deals with those ways, linguistic and extra-linguistic, through which consistency is achieved in a variety by eliminating – filtering in or out – certain linguistic forms and/or speech habits. It is not about how processes of language contact work; this has already been su‰ciently described in the literature. It is about how speakers freely move linguistic elements available in their multilingual repertoires across languages in very systematic and motivated ways, and how these features spread to form part of the norm of the language in a given area. By using the metaphor of the filter here, I wish to show that the filtration processes act as vanguards of the community’s norm and identity by blocking or filtering out those features that do not reflect the ecology of the society or that are produced by people who find pride in foreign or socially superior accents.

3. The well-received A Hanbook of Varieties of English published by De Gruyter in 2004 already set a good precedent for such extensive, system-based analyses.

120

Eric A. Anchimbe

As mentioned above, filtration takes place at two levels: linguistic and attitudinal. Linguistic or integrational filtration (section 3) explains how linguistic features from both internal and external sources are integrated into the norm of the variety. This process functions on two parameters: necessity of features to speakers and spread of features within the community of speakers. Attitudinal filtration (section 4) is based on the attitudes of members of the community towards speech habits that are foreign to them or that are too idiosyncratic to be generalised to the rest of the community. These two levels are described in this chapter with the aim of showing how CamE (or other New Englishes) achieved linguistic as well as attitudinal stability. The rest of the chapter is structured thus: section 2 introduces and describes the filtration processes framework and applies it to certain CamE words. The factors facilitating filtration and sources of words for filtration are presented in sections 3 and 4, along with examples from the 2003 survey. Section 5 examines the place of the metaphor of filtration in the future of IVEs and also calls for further research based on the filtration framework and others. Section 6 is the conclusion.

2. Filtration processes Again, the metaphor of filtration is used here to explain how new forms are introduced into a language or variety and how their positions in that language or variety become consolidated. The filtration processes sift widespread intelligible features, metaphorically washing them clean of social, regional and occupational marks and accommodating them into a variety of a language. A form X coming from language P could be (partially) synonymous with a form Y proposed by language Q both of which co-exist with English. What are the factors that make speakers (e.g. of CamE) prefer form Y over form X or vice versa? How does form Y succeed to reach the standard of the variety and form X does not? Are both forms initially used before one takes over to become the standard form for the referent denoted? These questions border on factors that facilitate the filtration of one form rather than another, the spread of one form rather than another, and the use by most speakers of that form over others which may be competing with it. When the process is completed, we say that form has been filtered into the variety. For the spread of linguistic forms to be testified, sociolinguistic surveys may be needed to assess their recurrence among speakers. As Table 5 in

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

121

section 3.2 below illustrates, stranger – as the word for an acquaintance (family relation, friend, colleague, etc.) who comes from far away to visit you at home – which was attested in many studies on lexical features of Cameroon and West African Englishes, was less used in Cameroon in 2003 than before. As the 2003 survey results show, stranger in that particular sense scores 31.7% as opposed to its competing counterpart guest, which is chosen by 44.7% of the 300 respondents. The word visitor comes in third place with 23.6%. We could, therefore, say that after a long period of competition between the three, guest is getting gradually filtered into CamE standard and may eventually displace stranger in representing this meaning. This happens possibly through a re-Englishisation process which functions thus: due perhaps to education and more exposure to native Englishes, English words that had adopted new or extended meanings in IVE contexts begin to give up such meanings for the original meanings found in native monolingual dictionaries. The example of stranger somehow illustrates this. In the next sections, I will, using examples from the 2003 data, explain in detail how filtration functions.

3. Linguistic or integrational filtration Linguistic or integrational filtration functions metaphorically like filters that sift linguistic forms such as lexical items, syntactic structures and semantic elements that have gained substantial spread among speakers, making them neutral and acceptable to other users of the variety. These features are filtered in a way that speakers no longer link them to their source languages, to the ethnic or social group that originally used them or to the biases, taboos and stereotypes previously attached to them or their original language or users. This model traces the life-cycle of new features within CamE, paying particular attention to the patterns and routes through which they enter the norm of the variety. It is based on the assumption that language is not a system of automatically generated symbols but rather one innovated and maintained by the linguistic habits of its users. When new elements enter into a language, there is a point where speakers unconsciously adopt them without remembering that they are ‘out-of-place’ or ‘foreign’ to the language. When this happens, the variety could be said to have been nativised and entrenched in the community, since it represents the speakers’ and their community’s linguistic ideals. Even though Figure 1 below represents only interlingual influences,

122

Eric A. Anchimbe

filtration also takes place with intralingual features (cf. the example of stranger, guest and visitor (Table 5).4 There are two fundamental bases on which features could be easily accepted for filtration. These have to do with the motivations for, and the appropriateness of, the features being filtered. Since filtration selects only one feature from a range of similar features, the selected feature must be suitable to satisfy the linguistic needs of the community. The first basis is that the feature should be needed for communal communication. Necessity is weighed against the background of the feature’s ability to project the new ecology and to reflect the speakers’ sociocultural identity. In this connection, therefore, necessary items will be the additive features, especially those that do not have existing alternatives in English and those that represent new concepts in the community. Names of food items (e.g. ekwang, egusi, garri), traditional or cultural concepts (e.g. manyi, cry die), clothing styles (e.g. agwada, sanja), belief systems (e.g. nyongo), traditional hierarchy (e.g. fon, ntumfor, nchinda) and new inventions (e.g. call box) are all part of this group of necessary integrations. The second basis is the appropriateness of the item. Appropriateness or niceness, in this case, is both linguistic (communicability of the feature) and non-linguistic (its form and attractiveness). Long, hard-to-pronounce, and taboo-laden words would generally not be chosen if they compete with shorter, easier to pronounce and less taboo-laden counterparts. The appellation fondom (referring to a village), for instance, is generally preferred due to its appropriateness when looked upon from the point of view of ruler and territory and when placed in analogy to existing English words: king-kingdom, duke-dukedom, hence, fon-fondom. We could also make allusion here to Ghanaian English enstool, on analogy with enthrone. Four major sources proprose features for filtration into CamE. Three of these are interlingual, i.e., from other languages, while one is intralingual, i.e., generated from within the system of the variety. The four sources are the French language (co-o‰cial language in Cameroon with English), Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE, a major lingua franca), the over 270 indigenous languages, and CamE speakers’ creations and innovations. These features are filtered into CamE at two main points: secondary and main filters. The secondary filters filter potentially necessary and competing elements and place them on the line for further filtration at the main

4. See Anchimbe (2006: 83) for an elaborate version and description of the linguistic (integrational) filter.

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

123

filter if they fulfil certain criteria. These filters are explained below using the examples matricule, ekwang and manyi. 3.1. The secondary filters The secondary filters are, technically speaking, farther away from CamE norm and serve as preliminary tests for the integration of new forms into the variety. These secondary filters are the regional filters, which filter new forms from the regional languages (indigenous languages, Frenchspeaking towns, and regional lingua francas), the occupational and social filters, which sift forms generated within professional circles and social groups, and the untranslatability filter, which accepts words in the form of direct loans because their translations tend to be inaccurate. These filters place features in line for further filtration at the main filter, which then ushers them into CamE. 3.1.1. The regional filter The regional filter works on linguistic features common to given regions of the country. Of course, Cameroon is so linguistically diversified that the linguistic elements that get involved in filtration at the regional level are often of very di¤erent origins. They could be of Francophone origin (where French is extensively used), or from the north (where the regional lingua franca, Fulfulde, is highly used), or from anywhere else in and out of the country – e.g. from neighbouring Nigeria or via films.5 Once these features successfully pass through the regional filter, they are no longer identified with the regions from which they come. The regional filter functions strongly in the integration of elements from the indigenous languages and also in certain creations or innovations that are produced in given regions. The words achu (a local meal) (Table 1) and manyi (mother of twins) (Table 2), for instance, began in particular regions but today have almost lost their ancestry due to their having been filtered and churned out anew in CamE. As illustrated in Tables 1 and 2, indigenous language elements compete at regional level with similar elements from other indigenous languages. The most suitable and widespread elements finally pass through and are 5. A good example is the word okada (a motorcycle used as a taxi, also called bend skin), which reached CamE from Nigeria through Nigerian home videos. We have compound words formed with it like: okada man (an okada rider) and okada people (okada riders).

124

Eric A. Anchimbe

placed on the line for further filtration at the main filter. In Table 1, achu (89%) is chosen over the other elements perhaps because the foodstu¤ originates from Bamenda, a cosmopolitan Anglophone area in which non-Ngemba speakers easily come into contact with the language. So, contact with source language speakers and the availability of this item in restaurants in the multilingual town facilitate its spread. Table 1. Filtration of foodstu¤ names at the regional filter Lexical item

Bamenda

Buea

Yaounde

Total

%

Status

achu

95

87

86

268

89.3

Filtered

fufu

2

9

4

15

5

Not Filtered

akwa

3

4

10

17

5.7

Not Filtered

Total

100

100

100

300

100

Table 2 deals with the belief system of most Cameroonian ethnic groups. As said earlier, belief systems are regional and generally supply additive elements to CamE. The notion tested in Table 2 is the names given to women who are mothers of twins. Since many ethnic groups have words for such mothers, these words have to compete at regional level before one or more are proposed for further filtration at the main filter. In Table 2, with 73.7% manyi/magni has been integrated into CamE. Table 2. Filtration of cultural naming strategies at the regional filter Lexical item

Source

Bamenda Buea Yaounde Total %

Status

manyi/magni Ngemba

61

83

77

221

twin mother

English

10

–

10

20

6.7 Not Filtered

mangyie

Ngemba

8

2

6

16

5.3 Not Filtered

mabi

Yamba

2

1

–

3

1

ma nfar

Limbum

2

2

–

4

1.3

no response

–

17

12

7

36

12

100

100

100

300

100

Total

73.7 Filtered

Not Filtered

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

125

Figure 1. Filtration of manyi at the regional filter

As Figure 1 illustrates, four words – from three languages: Ngemba (manyi, mangyie), Limbum (ma nfar), and Yamba (mabi) – could be said to have competed at the regional level for filtration before one successfully went through. These words were proposed by the respondents albeit with orthographic discrepancies, since most of these languages are not written. The word manyi6 or magni scores the highest (73.7%) and the anglicised counterpart, twin mother, comes with only 6.7%. All the terms in Figure 1 representing the mother of twins are additive features since no exact term exists in English. Because the notion of twins has strong cultural conceptualisations in Cameroonian cultures, it becomes di‰cult to adopt an English-based descriptive term like ‘twin mother’ since it does not encode such cultural values. As Figure 1 shows, words for this referent from various languages and cultures find themselves in use within the community until one or more is filtered into the norm and supplants the others. Competition takes place only at regional level but not at the 6. Even though manyi is from one of the Ngemba dialects, it was proposed in the survey by people from di¤erent native backgrounds who had other languages as L1, e.g. Bikom, Mungaka, Moghamo in the North West region, Bimbia, Bakweri, Oroko, Balong in the South West region, and Ngombale, Batie in the West region. This shows it no more reminds speakers of its origins.

126

Eric A. Anchimbe

main filter because the feature is additive and so has no counterpart in English to compete with. 3.1.2. The untranslatability filter While translation is inevitable in our interactions across languages and cultures, it is true that many words or expressions lose their salience and appeal when translated into another language. Others simply become clumsy, and there are those that yield quite new, o¤ensive or less accurate meanings when translated. Also, there are others that do not have any accurate translations. In the last case, we are obliged to carry them into the target language as they are. This is true of some CPE and French elements in CamE. If such elements pass through the untranslatability filter, their meanings gradually sink into the community, irrespective of their foreign structures. For instance, CPE ashia (communion keeping word to which addressees answer, thank you) and French a` la sante´ (similar to English cheers used before drinking) could be quite misleading if translated. In Cameroon, there is a tendency to use sorry as an English equivalent of ashia. This causes confusion because whereas ashia means ‘I empathise with you in your predicament’, sorry suggests to an English speaker ‘I am responsible for your predicament’. Untranslatability is often caused by di¤erences in cultural conceptualisations between the source and target language. It works from the premise that the sociocultural and conceptual systems of the source language are borne by its linguistic elements and may be lost when translated. Moreover, the concept represented by the word may be absent in the target language – as is the case with CPE ashia. English has no such tradition as encoded in CPE ashia. The untranslatability filter, therefore, authorises such foreign forms to be considered by the main filter for integration into CamE in their original form. The indigenous language word that was tested on the questionnaire is ekwang (Table 3), a traditional Cameroonian meal. An English translation

Table 3. Filtration of foodstu¤ names at the untranslatability filter Lexical item

Bamenda

Buea

Yaounde

Total

%

Status

Ekwang

79

75

74

228

76

Filtered

grated cocoyam

21

25

26

72

24

Not Filtered

100

100

100

300

100

Total

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

127

was provided, grated cocoyam (24%), which unfortunately is a partial description of the food itself. This was the only way to render it in English because the word ekwang cannot be translated into another language, especially English, which does not share the Cameroonian culinary ecology. Ekwang, with 76%, therefore, passes through the untranslatability filter in its original form. The untranslatability issue a¤ects words coming from the co-o‰cial language French as well. In Table 4, the word matricule (61%) is preferred even though two possible English equivalents were proposed along with it: identification number (1.7%) and registration number (35.6%). The latter might be integrated or filtered if it continues to compete with the French element. Table 4. Filtration of French words at the untranslatability filter Lexical item

Bamenda

Buea

Yaounde

Total

%

Status

matricule

64

57

62

183

61

Filtered

registration number

32

40

35

107

35.6

Might be Filtered

identification number

4

–

1

5

1.7

Not Filtered

no response

–

3

2

5

1.7

–

100

100

100

300

Total

100

Possible reasons for the filtration of matricule are: the population of users of the source language; French is widely spoken in Cameroon; the domain of use – matricule is used in higher education and in the public service to identify civil servants; and also the suitability of the item – it is shorter than the English equivalents. However, it is probable that registration number has gained this spread because of the creation of the University of Buea which, up till 2010 when the University of Bamenda was created, the only English-medium university in the country, and is situated in an anglophone town. Normally, the English equivalent would be preferred to the French counterpart. Before 1993 when the University of Buea was created, it is imaginable that matricule was in more frequent use. Again, it is only in Buea (see Table 4) that the di¤erence between respondents who chose matricule (57) and those who chose registration number (40) is less than 20, i.e. 17. In Yaounde, the di¤erence is 27 (62– 25) and in Bamenda it is 32 (64–32). A change in society could, hence be said to have triggered change in the language.

128

Eric A. Anchimbe

3.1.3. Occupational and social filters Professional and social groups exert influences on the languages they use. This is because language is very important for ‘‘further demarcations of identity and belonging,’’ which in most cases takes place ‘‘through social and professional group communication’’ (Anchimbe 2004: 3). Successful communication within these groups (professional and social) often requires understanding of the ‘restricted’ lexical items and meanings peculiar to the group. So, as long as these items remain in-group tools, members of the broader community will not consider them for use. But when they cross the borders of the group, having gone through the occupational and social filters, their use becomes general; and if this development continues unobstructed, then they might be integrated into CamE. An example is the word bushfaller – people, mostly youths, who migrate abroad, especially to Europe and North America, for economic reasons – initially used only by youths but which today is used by everyone. A verb has been backformed from it, to fallbush, and the act itself is bushfalling. New compounds have emerged involving the word, e.g. bushfaller mom, bushfaller dad for the mother and father of a bushfaller, respectively. Features that pass through this filter are of all kinds. The features from professional registers generally come from French, since national administration is predominantly in French. 3.2. The main filter The secondary filters pass forms for integration onto the main filter. This does not in any way guarantee their filtration into the norm because integration seems to work more on the principle of necessity and time rather than on the principle of prestige of the source code or its speakers, regardless of their numbers. The major filter carries out the final sifting or filtering of the linguistic items passed on by the secondary filters. At this filter, competition takes place between similar features that have passed through two or more secondary filters, or between newly filtered words and existing equivalents in the variety. At the end, some forms may be discarded or maintained in transition while others get filtered into the norm of the variety. Some integrated features sometimes fall out of favour shortly after filtration, and hence fall into disuse. Disuse here is associated with the non-reoccurrence of events for which the new words were coined. The post-presidential election strikes of 1992 in Cameroon, for example, led to the borrowing and semantic widening of the word

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

129

ghost town (strike action).7 Since calm returned to the country and no ghost towns have been declared, the word ghost town, with the meaning ‘strike’ seems to have been shelved. The principal characteristic of the main filter is its reliance on the spread of linguistic forms and their use by many speakers. The limit for gauging filtration could vary depending on several factors: the size of the survey, the choice of questions used in the survey, the respondents targeted in the survey, and the purpose of the survey. I set the base line for this investigation at 40% of the 300 respondents for three reasons: 1) the target respondents are not homogenous: 17–70 years of age, 2) the survey towns have di¤erent first o‰cial languages: Yaounde is mostly French-speaking and Bamenda and Buea are English-speaking, and 3) the multiple choice format of the questionnaire. As shown in the tables, at least 40% of the 300 respondents must use or identify an item before it can be considered filtered. If between 35% and 40% use it, it shows it might be filtered into CamE over an unpredictable period of time. There are two possible explanations for features that find themselves in the ‘‘might be filtered’’ category. Either they are still gaining spread and intelligibility or they are facing sti¤ competition from other (new) counterparts that may end up replacing them within the norm. The latter explanation possibly accounts for the status of the word stranger in the questionnaire. Only 31.8% of the respondents used it as opposed to 44.6% for guest and 23.6% for visitor (see Table 5 below). Many earlier studies (e.g. Platt et al. 1984, Simo Bobda 1994b) had identified stranger as a conspicuous example of semantic change in many IVEs. For it not to be filtered into CamE in 2003 suggests that another element might possibly be winning in the competition at the main integrational filter. Guest has gained substantial spread to a point where Cameroonians use it as a verb as in I am guested for I have guests. This could be a possible reason for it supplanting stranger in this meaning.

7. The expression ghost town was used in Cameroon in 1992 by the opposition parties particularly the Social Democratic Front (SDF). It referred to strike actions called by the opposition in which the towns were to be deserted by people in protest of results of presidential elections. No one went to work, no cars moved, businesses were closed and everything was supposed to be quiet.

130

Eric A. Anchimbe

Table 5. Filtration of replacive elements at the main filter Lexical item

Bamenda

Buea

Yaounde

Total

%

Status

guest

47

46

41

134

44.7

Filtered

stranger

29

30

36

95

31.7

Might be Filtered

visitor

24

24

23

71

23.6

Not Filtered

Total

100

100

100

300

100

4. Factors that facilitate linguistic filtration Certain factors make it possible for speakers to unconsciously use one word rather than another. Mufwene (1996) refers to this as competition and selection from what he calls the feature pool. I prefer to look at it as filtration because speakers, especially of IVEs, do not really always consciously select from a list or pool of available features. The spread and acceptability of features, however, is attached to several other factors that sway speakers’ choice of them. These factors include the appeal of the item, the number of its users, and its status. 4.1. Appeal of the item By appeal, reference is made here to the phonetic and/or orthographic attractiveness of a word or expression, which could lead to its spreading more rapidly, thereby ensuring its filtration into the norm. Filtration is, in principle, easier if the word is short (the principle of least e¤ort), easy to articulate, and has non-taboo meaning. One of the reasons for the filtration of matricule (Table 4), as proposed earlier, could be its brevity compared to the English counterpart. The same reason could be advanced for other CamE words from French like concours (competitive examination), patente (business tax), vignette (road-tax disc), and mandat (postal money order). 4.2. Population of its users A further factor that facilitates filtration is the population of speakers of the language that supplies the new element or the social group from which it originates. Given that filtration depends on general usage, and usage is further complemented by number of users, the population using a given

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

131

item is important for its filtration. If it is generated from a region, occupation, or social group that has many members spread throughout the country, prospects for its filtration into CamE would be high. Youths and students are generally mobile, are ready to switch to new patterns of speech and are usually innovative in language usage. So, new forms easily spread among them and may eventually trigger changes in language or variety. The recurrence of registration number, discussed above (Table 4) is an example – its spread is attributable to its use by students of the University of Buea. 4.3. Status of the item As mentioned earlier, additive and replacive words undergo di¤erent procedures for filtration. While the additives are not necessarily subject to competition at the main filter, the replacives are. Thus, status is very important in the filtration process. The words ekwang, fon, and manyi easily filter into the norm of CamE because they, just like the referents and concepts they represent, are absent in English but present in the socio-geographical environment of Cameroon. Similarly, English in the IVE areas, according to Mazrui and Mazrui (1998) and Mufwene (2001), is additive – which explains why it has not yet run into conflict with the local languages. However, stranger is open to competition with guest since they are both English words and the concept they represent is also known in English. 4.4. Socio-political climate The socio-political climate of a region or country at a given time is often reflected in its language. At given points in the evolution of the society several events happen for which names must be created. When these names are created, they are immediately integrated into the mainstream variety, given that they, at that time, form part of the necessary (additive) vocabulary. The major post-integration outcome may be that these words end up falling into disuse after the event is forgotten or resolved (cf. ghost town above). For instance, the heavily guarded headquarters of the US-led coalition forces in Iraq is/was called the Green Zone. This name may have run out of its existence now that the o‰cial occupation of Iraq has ended. However, some words or expressions coined in this manner may be fully accessible to speakers at all times who use them in other situations. An example is the expression man of timber and calibre (Adegbija 1989: 170) in Nigerian English, which refers to an important and influential

132

Eric A. Anchimbe

political personality. Since Kingsley Mbadiwe, a prominent Nigerian politician, first used it, it has continued to be in active use even in reference to non-political figures. Perhaps a more long lasting example is the use of the term The Troubles for the years of fighting in North Ireland. Similarly, projections in Germany about a possible coalition government after the stalemate in the September 2005 elections came up with the expression Jamaica Coalition – formed after the colours of the Jamaican flag since these colours correspond to the colours of the parties tipped for such a coalition. In 2009, a Jamaica Coalition was actually formed in Saarland, hence immortalising the expression since it now occurs in written documents and is heard regularly on radio and television. 4.5. Prominence of source language The prominence of a language in a contact situation easily enables its features to filter into the other languages with which it is in contact. This is simply because it is more available across the society and is more frequently heard even by those who do not speak it. It is perhaps because of the prominence of French in Cameroon that Simo Bobda (1994b: 245) observes that ‘‘French does not only donate direct loans, but also permeates every other lexical innovation process’’ in CamE. Since French is used in about 75% of national life, its forms easily get into CamE through their availability (for more on the impact of French on CamE, see Kouega 1999 and Mbangwana 1999).

5. Attitudinal filtration ‘‘Cameroonians who insist on sounding like Britons are ridiculed rather than admired.’’ (Mbangwana 1987: 423) ‘‘When you try to speak British English, people instead get jealous and think you are crazy. So you are forced to use the pidgin others speak like English.’’ (Respondent in Buea, 2003)8

The first step in the defence of one’s variety of a language is awareness that the variety exists and that its speakers are identified or identify themselves positively with it. The majority of the speakers will, therefore, be 8. This respondent is a male student at the University of Buea, aged between 17 and 25, and holds a GCE Advanced Level certificate. He speaks both French (try) and CPE (very good) and has an (unidentified) indigenous language as L1.

133

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

able to say who is an acceptable speaker of the variety and who is not. Patterns of speaking that do not belong to the variety will be castigated in a bid to keep the linguistic identity speakers build around it in tact. The two quotes above illustrate this. From Table 6 (cf. below), it is clear that most of the respondents are aware that Cameroonians speak English in a distinct way (92.6%) and that a variety of English, CamE, exists in the country (74.3%). So, the attitudinal filtration process is built on the premise that speakers in a given community accept or reject speech patterns in ways that favour the maintenance of their shared qualities. This is an extra-linguistic process through which CamE speakers emotionally or attitudinally repudiate those ways of speaking that appear foreign, estranged or grotesque to them. Those speakers who imitate foreign accents or impose their idiosyncrasies on the variety for social superiority reasons tend to be disdained by other members of the community. Although it may be claimed that imitating other speakers is motivated by the desire to copy their social esteem, those who generally do this are treated as social misfits trying to ape speech habits that do not match their own social status. They may be mocked at, scorned, rejected, and in some cases considered non-users of the standard. Due to this, they eventually may prefer to refrain from such accents to use the locally accepted one, as the respondent in Buea comments above. The question that comes up is: do speakers reject these foreign-sounding, idosyncratic speech patterns through consciousness of the existence of a communal variety or simply ‘‘out of jealousy’’, as the respondent claims? Although linguistic features identified with given communities may not be produced by all members, most of them are used by a larger portion of the community. Certain questions in the questionnaire sought to get the speakers’ awareness of the existence of CamE. Table 6. Cameroon English speakers’ awareness of the variety Yes

No

Questions

#

%

#

Ever listened to other Africans speak English?

292

97.3

6

Do Cameroonians speak English di¤erently?

278

92.6

Does Cameroon English exist?

223

74.3

I don’t know %

#

%

2

2

0.7

13

4.4

9

3

59

19.7

18

6

134

Eric A. Anchimbe

As reported in Table 6, 292 (97.3%) of the 300 respondents said they had listened to other Africans from Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Zambia and South Africa speak English. 278 (92.6%) claimed Cameroonians speak English di¤erently from these people. And 223 (74.3%) said CamE exists. They are, therefore, on this basis, capable of filtering in those features and patterns that are Cameroonian (or theirs) from those that are foreign (or not theirs). 5.1. Bases of attitudinal filtration People have di¤erent reasons for speaking in ways that make them easily identified among others. Among these reasons are the quest for social esteem, exposure to other accents (being sometimes the natural outcome of contact or a cultivated habit), and the desire to imitate foreign accents for prestige. The desire to institute social stratification through language, suggestive of distinct speaking patterns, is often rejected (cf. Bamgbose 1971, Sey 1973, Mbangwana 1987). This rejection and the patterns through which it occurs is at the centre of the attitudinal filtration process. The first major reason why people choose socially superior accents is to (re)produce social stratification in the society. Since English is essentially acquired through education and is used predominantly for o‰cial and formal purposes, adopting a foreign or socially superior accent is often interpreted as adopting a socially superior position. So, adopting a foreign accent means creating a social class superior to non-educated or less educated people and also educated people who cannot/do not speak in this manner. It is often worse when speakers ‘‘sometimes deliberately sacrifice their [knowledge of correct] grammar for stylistic e¤ects for the purpose of social impression management’’ (Banda 1996: 67). These accents, thus attached to social stratification, are rejected or are attitudinally filtered out by the community. The respondent in Buea quoted above sees the society’s attitudinal rejection of his foreign and prestige accent as jealousy. This simply indicates that the society has a strong influence on what constitutes the standard of the language they speak. Even though they cannot spell out the phonology of CamE, they are still aware of those features that are part of their standard and those that are outright foreign. The second way of speaking that is attitudinally filtered out is the use of foreign accents. In the evolution of IVEs, many negative reactions have been registered against those who speak like foreign native speakers. In Nigeria, for instance, ‘‘many Nigerians will consider as a¤ected or even snobbish any Nigerians who speak like a native speaker of English’’

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

135

(Bamgbose 1971: 41). Similarly, in Ghana ‘‘the type [of English] that strives too obviously to approximate to RP is frowned upon as distasteful and pedantic’’ (Sey 1973: 1). In Cameroon, as well, ‘‘Cameroonians who insist on sounding like Britons are ridiculed rather than admired’’ (Mbangwana 1987: 423). These attitudinal filtrations bring back memories of the been-tos of the 1960s and 1970s, but with a di¤erent vision; i.e., those who have not been-to want to be thought of as having been-to through the way they speak English. The foreign patterns are filtered out of the local standard not by any agreed upon rules but rather by the community’s attitude towards them. This form of filtration is similar to the rejection of certain ethnolects that are considered too far removed from the accent of CamE, e.g. Nso English discussed by Fonyuy in chapter 5 of this volume. 5.2. Outcomes of attitudinal filtration The consequences of attitudinal filtration are twofold: linguistic and extralinguistic. Linguistically, speakers who adopt foreign varieties or accents lose their right as reference points for what is correct or incorrect in the language. That is, they no longer constitute part of the community of those who can be identified as standard bearers, e.g. of CamE or Ghanaian English, because their accents place them outside the scope of the variety. In delimiting the acceptable speakers of CamE, Simo Bobda and Mbangwana (1993: 201) filter out ‘‘the speech of a handful of Cameroonians who have been so influenced by other varieties (RP, American English) that they can no longer be considered as representative of the English spoken in Cameroon’’. Extra-linguistically, those speakers lose their social and linguistic identity as members of the community. Since their speech is Western-inclined, they are said to have lost their African identity. Far back in the 1970s, Boadi (1971: 53) said, ‘‘educated Ghanaians lose some of their African identity in their e¤orts, in using a language which is alien to them, to ape native speakers’’. Due to this filtration, therefore, ‘‘only very few Nigerians or Ghanaians would like to surrender their African personality and speak the prestigious English RP’’ (Yankson 1989: 149). The respondent in Buea quoted above is bound to retain his CamE accent if he wants to be part of the linguistic identity and be considered a normal reference point of the variety. Attitudinal filtration, as the factors above suggest, is a relevant tool for variety regularisation since it operates not only on the linguistic features of

136

Eric A. Anchimbe

speakers but also on their personality and identity. It also regulates those patterns that may not be designed according to native or foreign accents but are based precisely on idiosyncrasy. It may, therefore, go as far as regulating pronunciation, stress patterns, intonation patterns, and other prosodic elements that generally set speakers apart. As a result, the speech patterns of the community would tend to remain similar.

6. Filtration and the future of IVEs Varieties of English, especially postcolonial varieties, have generally been treated as being exceedingly distinct in the extent of interference and borrowing from indigenous languages. Interference and borrowing were often erroneously projected as the only facets of these varieties. Given that more and more is being known about these varieties and the contexts in which they evolve, new approaches are needed to investigate them. The filtration processes, which could as well be applied selectively in other multilingual contexts, brings us closer to a better understanding of language or variety evolution, independent of language contact approaches. This approach gives us an emic view of the linguistic variation in these areas and how speakers’ attitudes towards each other impact on the choice of forms and the stabilisation of the standard of the variety. In a nutshell, the metaphor of filtration: – gives new dimensions for the study of IVEs that do not necessarily put them on a comparative-contrastive scale with older varieties, – permits these varieties to be studied within their socio-historically complete contexts – not as fallouts of inaccurate acquisition, – provides answers to the question of standard by proposing that standard be measured in terms of usage and spread among accepted users of the variety. New theoretical frameworks must, if they have to do justice to these contexts, situate these varieties in the socio-historical conditions of their emergence and evolution, and describe them as they are and not as infant varieties struggling to reach the norms of the native varieties. The new theories should enable us to re-evaluate the paths of IVE evolution and establish the mix of factors that facilitate the inscription of the local ecology and the representation of the tastes and preferences of the speakers on the language. Whether particular IVEs have evolved towards or away from the older Englishes should no longer be a priority because this throws us

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

137

back to the comparative and contrastive interference approaches adopted between the 1960s and 1990s. The availability of new frameworks like Schneider’s (2007) dynamic model makes it easy to complement the historical route of the evolution process with the linguistic and extra-linguistic provisions made by the filtration processes framework. An important recommendation would be that future research applies these frameworks to particular varieties and from both typological-synchronic and diachronicsynchronic perspectives.

7. Conclusion This chapter, like Simo Bobda’s (4) and Wolf ’s (3) chapters in this volume, presents an analytical framework for the investigation of CamE (and other varieties of English). It calls for a new turn in research in these Englishes based not on the application of old and existing frameworks designed for the West but rather on emic approaches that take the complex IVE settings and the multilingual abilities of speakers into account. Contrary to the contrastive-comparative, language contact approaches of the past, the filtration model described in this chapter, calls for typological analyses, from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives, of IVEs in ways that show them as existing in socio-historically independent communities in which speakers use the language more or less in the same way as the indigenous languages or Pidgins or Creoles that form part of the linguistic ecology. They are no longer coping with English as if it was a foreign language to them. Even though many things have been said about the filtration processes in this chapter, I must add that most of them will have to be properly applied to specific contexts and varieties so that we know exactly how the processes function. It is possible that results in one context may be slightly di¤erent from results in other contexts; this should be normal because colonialism was received di¤erently in di¤erent communities. The framework should, therefore, be applied to situations that match the characteristics outlined therein should also be similar to the Cameroonian context.

References Adegbija, Efurosibina. 1989. Lexico-semantic variation in Nigerian English. World Englishes 8(2): 165–177.

138

Eric A. Anchimbe

Anchimbe, Eric A. 2004. Lexical markers of social (youth) group communication in Cameroon. Proceedings of 4th Postgraduate Forum on Linguistics, Hong Kong University. 1–8. www.hku.hk/linguist/conf/prf/4prf-proceedings.pdf. Accessed 05 August 2010. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006. Cameroon English: Authenticity, Ecology and Evolution. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2009. Post-integrational restructuring of new lexical elements in Cameroon English. Annals of the Faculty of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, University of Yaounde I. Special edition, Festschrift in Honour of Professor Paul N. Mbangwana. 83–100. Bamgbose, Ayo. 1971. The English language in Nigeria. In: Spencer, John (ed.), pp. 35–48. Banda, Felix. 1996. The scope and characterisation of African English: Some sociolinguistic considerations. English World-Wide 17(1): 63–75. Boadi, Lawrence A. 1971. Education and the role of English in Ghana. In: Spencer, John (ed.), pp. 49–65. Echu, George and Allan W. Grundstrom (eds.). 1999. O‰cial Bilingualism and Linguistic Communication in Cameroon. New York: Peter Lang. Kouega, Jean-Paul. 1999. The influence of French on Cameroon English: A case study of the registers of administration and finance. In: Echu and Grundstrom (eds.), pp. 103–111. Mazrui, Ali A. and Alamin M. Mazrui. 1998. The Power of Babel: Language and Governance in the African Experience. Oxford: James Currey. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1987. Some characteristics of sound patterns of Cameroon Standard English. Multilingua IV(4): 411–424. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1999. Linguistic deculturation of English usage in Cameroon. In: Echu and Grundstrom (eds.), pp. 87–102. Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1996. Creole genesis: A population genetics perspective. In: Christie, Pauline (ed.), Caribbean Language Issues: Old and New. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press. 168–209. Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mufwene, Salikoko S. and Sheri Pargman. 2003. Competition and selection in the development of American Englishes. World Englishes 22(4): 367–375. Platt, John, Heidi Weber and Mian Lian Ho. 1984. The New Englishes. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English. Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schneider, Edgar W. 2008. Towards endonormativity? African English and the dynamic model of the evolution of postcolonial Englishes. In: Harrow, Kenneth and Kizitus Mpoche (eds.), Language, Literature and Education in Multicultural Societies. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 283–305. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Narr. Sey, Kofi A. 1973. Ghanaian English. London: Macmillan.

The filtration processes in Cameroon English

139

Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994a. Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Bern: Peter Lang. Simo Bobda, Augustin. 1994b. Lexical innovation processes in Cameroon English. World Englishes 13(2): 245–260. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Paul N. Mbangwana. 1993. An Introduction to Spoken English. Lagos: University of Lagos Press. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Sammy B. Chumbow. 1999. The trilateral process in Cameroon English phonology. English World-Wide 20(1): 35–65. Spencer, John (ed.). 1971. The English Language in West Africa. London: Longman. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2006. Religion and traditional belief in West African English. In: Omoniyi, Tope and Joshua A. Fishman (eds.), Explorations into the Sociology of Language and Religion. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 42–59. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2008. A cognitive linguistic approach to the cultures of World Englishes: The emergence of a new model. In: Kristiansen, Gitte and Rene´ Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 353–385. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen. 2009. World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Yankson, Kofi E. 1989. Better English through Concord for West African Students. Uruowulu-Obosi, Nigeria: Pacific Publishers.

Chapter 7 Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament Lilian Lem Atanga 1. Introduction Although popularly and o‰cially referred to as a bilingual country (in French and English), Cameroon is indeed multilingual. Cameroon’s language policies have varied over the decades, and since independence, ‘national unity’ and ‘national integration’ have been dominant discourses. Since independence, the country functions on a state bilingualism policy which accords French and English (equal) o‰cial status. This policy recognises French and English as the languages for education, politics and administration, international relations, state media, and the judicial system, among other formal domains. In spite of attempts at di¤erent points in time to raise the indigenous languages to some o‰cial status by linguists and language activists, French and English have continued to be favoured and empowered by state policies as the sole o‰cial languages (for more on this, see Echu 1999 and Tamanji 2008). As Echu (1999) points out, the state’s support for, and promotion of, the o‰cial languages has had a great impact on the national language policy, which for a long time has placed these two languages in the spotlight, to the detriment of the indigenous languages. It has also a¤ected people’s preferences in language choice and the construction of linguistic identities. These identities have, as a consequence, become fluid and fluctuative since people have to respond to challenges resulting from switching across languages and identities. Identity has over the years tended to be constructed through not only ethno-linguistic a‰liation (use of ethnic Cameroonian languages) but also through o‰cial language boundaries, on the basis of what Anchimbe (2005) refers to as anglophonism (English-speaking) and francophonism (French-speaking). The Cameroonian parliament is a platform on which these identities and the choice of language(s) are very well played out. With French and English as authorised business languages, speakers choose to react to, and/or construe speakers of the other o‰cial language in di¤erent intriguing ways. Very often the reasons for this are: 1) to make clear their intention in choosing one or the other language, e.g. showing attachment to, or

142

Lilian Lem Atanga

distance from, the group that speaks that o‰cial language, 2) to convince listeners to think better of them, e.g. as being empathetic, 3) to achieve positive social esteem by speaking the other o‰cial language (especially francophones speaking English), i.e. to be considered a true bilingual, and 4) to live up to the exigencies of the context, e.g. during Question and Answer time in parliament when questions are asked in both languages. All of these factors intertwine and, as discussed below, establish the place of (political) power in the choice of language and in the display or portrayal of a linguistic identity built on that language. In the rest of the chapter, I examine the motivations of language choice in the Cameroonian parliament, the relationship between language choice and identity, and how this choice reflects national identity. I also investigate whether the di¤erent linguistic choices people make within the Cameroonian parliament are related to the power relationships within this context. This will be done by seeking answers to questions like: Can group identity, in this case, anglophone and francophone identities, be manifested through the linguistic choices people make? Are the linguistic choices made in the parliament indicative of power relations between the di¤erent linguistic sub-groups? These questions will be answered by verifying which level of identity the di¤erent speakers portray: imposed identities, assumed identities, negotiable identities, or displayed identities (see e.g. Davies and Harre´ 1990, Blackledge 2005). In the next section, I first of all present the social actors, i.e. persons whose speeches are analysed. These persons are either Members of Parliament (MPs) or government ministers including the Prime Minister (PM). 2. Social actors in the Cameroonian parliament The term ‘social actor’ is used in the critical discourse analytical context to refer to people who populate a (con)text (van Leeuwen 1996) as well as those who are intentionally included or excluded in a piece of discourse. These people may simply be highlighted or backgrounded in the text or discourse; they could also be named or simply suppressed, i.e. represented or referred to even in their absence. Within the context of the parliament, the possible social actors are the speakers, i.e. ministers and MPs, the audience present in the parliament during the sessions, and the millions of Cameroonians referred to by the MPs and ministers in their speeches. For the purpose of this chapter, I will limit my analyses to speeches by MPs, ministers and the PM in the parliament, and particularly the choice of language in a bid to illustrate how this exposes group identity and individual socio-political aspirations.

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

143

The Cameroonian Parliament is made up of 180 MPs. They are elected by popular vote and on party lines. In the parliamentary sessions surveyed, five political parties had representatives in the parliament. These were: Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM: ruling party), Social Democratic Front (SDF, main opposition party), Union des Populations du Cameroun (UPC), National Union for Democracy and Progress (NUDP), and Cameroon Democratic Union (CDU). Identity construction within parliament, taking these social actors into consideration, generally goes along party lines, (ethno)-linguistic boundaries, and the o‰cial language divide. This means therefore that an individual may wear di¤erent coats of identity at di¤erent times: when defending the party, when allying with their ethnic group or language, and when projecting their o‰cial language as francophone or anglophone. So, clear lines are di‰cult to draw when it comes to this. This is because, as Blackledge (2005: 36) truly observes, identities are socially and discursively constructed in relation to variables such as race, age, class, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and social status, and we may add political leaning, and they can be and are often negotiated. Although political identities are highlighted and negotiated in the discourse of MPs and ministers, I will focus here on linguistic ones based on language choice. The speakers in the parliament are predominantly French-speaking, due obviously to the numerical and territorial majority of the francophone part of the country. Occupying eight regions (provinces) out of ten, it is normally expected that they would be the majority in the parliament irrespective of political party. Most of these francophone MPs are generally not able to fluently express themselves in English. On a general note, few MPs and ministers recorded during the data collection period were bilingual. Most of them had su‰cient mastery only of their first o‰cial language (OL1): English for anglophones and French for francophones. So, most of the speeches analysed in this chapter are in their first o‰cial language. For instance, in example (1) below, MP Mbaya speaks only in English and MP Njoya only in French. The Speaker, even though serving as moderator, speaks only in French, even when addressing MPs who may not understand French well. This macro switch from English by one speaker to French by the other is itself a marker of national identity. However, we also find a few examples of micro switch, i.e. by the same speaker but these are generally limited to isolated sentences as in example (3) or brief phrases as in example (4) below. However, the few bilingual MPs and ministers surveyed for this paper were involved in various forms of language choice and identity adoption

144

Lilian Lem Atanga

that are worth studying here. Besides, most MPs and ministers often also resort to code-switching and code-mixing to make their point in parliament.

3. The data The parliament was chosen for this type of research because it is unique; it is where national policies, including language policies, are designed and implemented. Although it is supposed to protect the interest of the nation in every way and display the actual identity of the country linguistically, one of the identities of the country is being suppressed. The parliament does not use any of the over 270 indigenous languages of the country. It is interesting to note that parliament has passed several bills in favour of indigenous languages but it does not use any of them, nor has it proposed any of them to be used in the parliament. This is a thorny issue for the state and has been treated as a potential threat to national integration and national unity. I will not go into this discussion here but for more information on it, see Mbangwana et al. (2006), Anchimbe (2006) and Tamanji (2008). However, the parliament has remained true to the country’s policy of state bilingualism in English and French, as the choices of languages analysed below show. The data for this chapter were collected during the June and November 2005 parliamentary sessions. The data consist of over eight hours of recordings of plenary sessions which were then transcribed (verbatim). Since the analysis carried out here are on language choice and identity, I have not included the extra-linguistic features that go with speech, e.g. facial expressions, gestures, hesitations, pauses, voice pitch, etc. In transcribing the recordings, I paid attention to the switch between English and French and the motivations behind it. Where necessary, I have presented exchanges between the MPs and the Speaker of the House. But in most examples, I have provided only excerpts in which relevant information is found. Although the data were collected during two types of plenary sessions, I have not made any strict distinction between them. The two plenary sessions are: Question and Answer sessions where parliamentarians ask questions and government ministers respond to them. Questions could be asked in any of the two o‰cial languages and the ministers in turn could respond in the language of their choice. The second type is the Discussion session where there could be questions or comments and observations from both the MPs and the ministers. As such, the MPs and the ministers interact equally during the Discussion sessions.

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

145

The data, therefore, include speeches in French and English or in both languages in cases where speakers code switched (see MP Evina in example 3). In some cases, speakers o¤ered interpretations or translations of what they had said in the other o‰cial language or simply answered questions in the language in which they are asked (see PM in 2D below).

4. Language and identity The links between language and identity are often complex. Depending on the type of society, these links could be refurbished by other factors such as political power, ethnic belonging, social hierarchy, and individual aspirations. In multilingual societies, Blackledge (2005: 35) explains, ‘‘language choice, use, and attitudes are intrinsically linked to language ideologies, relations of power, political arrangements, and speaker’s identities’’. This therefore means that in such contexts, the choice of a particular language may be driven by a speaker’s desire to establish his or her linguistic identity. When these identity discourses are produced by people of high socio-political standing, e.g. the prime minister, then the ideologies spread through them could be said to be legitimised (Fairclough 1992, 2001). Although they find expression through discourse and social interaction, identities generally spring from people’s desire to form a group, to exclude others from that group, and to uphold values of the group. Identities are thus socially and discursively constructed in relation to di¤erent variables, which, as mentioned above, include linguistic a‰liation, ethnic background, gender, and social status. They are not fixed since individuals may choose to display a particular identity at a given point in time (Krzyz˙anowski and Wodak 2007). They are rather negotiable, even though certain identities may be forced on people. Individual identities are linked to sex, age, social status, group, and cultural or national identity. These identities are internalised through socialisation, e.g. education, politics, the media, food, dressing, sports and everyday practice (De Celia et al. 1999: 4). According to De Fina et al. (2006) and Blackledge (2005), several levels of identity exist across di¤erent societies. These include: – Imposed identities (non-negotiable): these are identities we are born with such as being naturally male or female, being black or white. – Assumed identities (accepted and not negotiable): these are identities ascribed to us by society; identities we accept, e.g. being a wife.

146

Lilian Lem Atanga

– Negotiable identities (contested by groups or individuals): these are within our power to choose to acceptor reject. For instance, depending on the context, a woman can negotiate her identity as a wife or a career woman. – Displayed identities (projected by individuals): These are identities that could be assumed or imposed but that are highlighted by the individual. For example, the francophone MP (3) who decides to speak English when closing her argument displays her identity as a bilingual Cameroonian. Since these di¤erent levels of identity could also be manifested discursively, they are therefore malleable, fragile, and frequently ambivalent (see Davies and Harre´ 1990, Blackledge 2005, Caldas-Coulthard and Iedema 2008). Individuals may find themselves in perpetual tension between self-chosen identities and others’ attempts to position them di¤erently. This has been extensively analysed by proponents of the positioning theory (Pavlenko and Blackledge 2004, Bamberg 2004, 2005, Blackledge 2005, De Fina et al. 2006). Positioning refers to discursive practices that are aimed at positioning individuals in particular ways or allowing individuals to position themselves. Cameroonians are often caught in an identity web in which they generally have to position or reposition themselves or have to position others or let themselves be positioned by others. The parliament is a venue in which this also happens. Anglophone MPs in parliament were once pushed into a rare bipartisan solidarity by the action of a francophone MP who referred to an anglophone MP as a Nigerian, simply because he spoke in English. The Post newspaper reported the incident thus: A plenary session of the just-ended parliamentary session . . . slipped into the sidelines of a row when one MP called Paulinus Jua a Nigerian . . . Anglophone CPDM MPs equally protested that somebody referred to a fellow Cameroonian as a Nigerian simply because he spoke in English. When calm returned, Jua said he was happy and proud that he was born an Anglophone. Said he; ‘‘I am an Anglophone from former West Cameroon and I am proud of that.’’ (The Post newspaper, December 20, 2004)

So, as mentioned above, parliamentarians construct or portray di¤erent layers of identity or position themselves in di¤erent solidarity groups in response to specific issues or challenges. This is a spontaneous response to the requirements of context or situation. Although they normally position themselves within the party or adopt political party identities in normal parliamentary business, the anglophone MPs of all political parties in

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

147

parliament were forced by a given situation to reposition themselves or to re-ignite their identity as anglophones as shown in the incident recounted above. This identity is apparently above party allegiance, and is nonnegotiable. In the excerpt above, Jua declares his anglophone identity thus, ‘‘I am an Anglophone from former West Cameroon and I am proud of that.’’ The following table (Table 1) is adapted from Block (2006: 37) and includes two additional variables, 7 and 8, that apply to multilingual societies like Cameroon. It shows how people could be identified as belonging to groups. In some situations, this belonging could be intentional or premeditated (e.g. social class, political alliances, and language), in others it is natural (e.g. gendered, racial, ethnic), and in some more it could be the trajectory of history (e.g. national and ex-colonial heritage). The historical and the premeditated facets recur in the linguistic choices speakers make in parliament. Below, we will see how these are exploited for political gains. Table 1. Major markers of individual and collective identities (adapted from Block 2006: 37) Ascription or a‰liation

Based on or major features

1.

Ethnic

Shared history, descent, belief systems, practices, language and religion, all associated with a cultural group

2.

Racial

Biological, genetic make up, i.e. racial phenotype

3.

National

Shared history, descent, belief systems, practices, language and religion, all associated with a nation

4.

Gendered

Nature of conformity to socially constructed notions of femininities and masculinities

5.

Social class

Income level, occupation, education and symbolic behaviour

6.

Language

Relationship between one’s sense of self and di¤erent means of communication: language, dialect or sociolect (could be related to ethnic or ex-colonial a‰liation)

7.

Ex-colonial heritage

First o‰cial language (English or French), majority or minority, political a‰liation and stereotypes (e.g. anglophones are opposers, francophones are disorderly)

8.

Political alliances

Ruling party or opposition party

148

Lilian Lem Atanga

5. Language choice, identity negotiation and power Language is often referred to as having power. But what happens when the power of language is added to political power? Do multilingual speakers have the power to choose the language they prefer in all contexts or are they constrained by certain factors? Answers to these questions vary from context to context and from individual to individual. In multilingual Cameroon, people certainly often ask themselves similar questions: Which o‰cial language should I use: my first o‰cial language or the second? Which language will best suit my specific objectives for this conversation? Will I be served in that o‰ce if I used my first o‰cial language? This is because linguistic choices within specific contexts often position speakers either as powerful or as powerless. When a speaker is powerless, s/he may be open to linguistic victimisation (Anchimbe 2007) in a way similar to what Paulinus Jua su¤ers in the excerpt above. So to avoid this, speakers often make choices that enable them to belong to esteemed groups, which are or share in the status of ‘powerful’ groups. As an illustration, the Speaker of the House, see (1) and (2) below, sticks to French all the time because he wields the power, he gives MPs the chance to talk and can order them from the rostrum. He does not therefore need to position himself. In all his turns in (1) and (2) he uses French even though the speakers he introduces speak in French and English. He still sticks to French even after listening to the PM who prefers to speak first in English and then in French. In over eight hours of talking time, the Speaker did not once address parliament in English. Even when reinterpreting questions asked in English by English-speaking MPs, he still used French. In his first turn in (1), the Speaker summarises MP Mbaya’s question in French before o¤ering him the floor: ‘‘sa question . . . budget solde des agents de l’E´tats’’. We could also interpret this as a strategy of perpetuating or portraying his francophone identity, perhaps in resistance to the anglophone identity to which Mbaya belongs. (1) A: SPEAKER: . . . Je voudrais donner la parole a` l’honorable Awoudou Mbaya. . . pour sa question a` Monsieur le Premier Ministre [Chef ] du gouvernement pour l’assainissement du budget solde des agents de l’E´tat. Mr Awoudou, vous avez la parole. (Mbaya does not show up) Je donne la parole a` l’honorable Adamu Ndam Njoya pour sa question sur la culture de l’e´thique de la citoyennete´ et l’inde´pendance du processus e´lectoral. Monsieur l’honorable Adamu Ndam Njoya vous avez la parole.

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

149

B: MP NJOYA: Monsieur le Pre´sident, Monsieur le Premier Ministre. . .C’est ainsi que nous pourrons consolider notre identite´ sur le plan interne lui donnant ainsi toute sa force sur le plan international, africain et universel. Je voulais monsieur le Premier Ministre que vous nous dites un peu ce que vous faites s’agissant de tout cela. Merci Monsieur le Pre´sident. A: SPEAKER: Maintenant, honorable Awoudou Mbaya pour l’assainissement du budget solde des agents de l’E´tat. C: MP MBAYA: Mr Speaker, your Excellency Mr Prime Minister, Head of government, before I come to the question, which I consider is very pertinent for the people of this nation, let me make this observation . . . And so the nation will want to get your concrete explanation that will alleviate the fears of the tax payers and the Cameroonian people in general in a bid to restore hope and confidence. Thank you Mr Prime Minister. In perhaps a move to maintain their linguistic identities (ex-colonial heritages) as anglophone and francophone, MP Mbaya and MP Njoya speak entirely in English and French respectively. The PM of the Republic of Cameroon at the time of data collection was English-speaking, but as PM, he is expected to be bilingual. He always addresses the parliament in both French and English, but ironically he speaks a lot more French than English. An excerpt of his speech (2B) in the June 2005 session shows this micro switch1 between English and French in the same turn. He is responding to questions asked by two MPs, one in English and the other in French (1).

1. I distinguish between ‘micro switch’ and ‘macro switch’ in the sense that, micro switch is when the same individual within the same speech event switches to another language. Macro switch on the other hand involves more than one individual within the same speech context switching from one language to the other, with the possibility of each speaking a di¤erent language but both understanding each other.

150

Lilian Lem Atanga

(2) A: SPEAKER: Messieurs les de´pute´s, la parole a` Monsieur le Chef du gouvernement. B: PRIME MINISTER: The right honourable speaker, honourable members of the National Assembly, I want to thank you first of all for giving me the honour and privilege for standing in front of this august assembly to address you and to answer some questions which have bothered some members of assembly. [. . .] Bien, Monsieur le pre´sident, permettez-moi de passer a` la deuxie`me question. C’est la question de l’honorable de´pute´ Adamu Ndam Njoya qui aimerait savoir les mesures prises ou envisage´es par le gouvernement pour, une part, restaurer les principes moraux, les valeurs selon lui feraient totalement de´faut dans notre pays. Although the PM does not share his talk time 50–50 between French and English, he, however, in his usage subtly suggests that both languages have the same o‰cial status. In the same turn (2B), the PM switches from English to French and speaks in French for the rest of the time. He uses about 1600 words in English and 960 in French during his speech. Considering that the PM is English-speaking (i.e. an anglophone), this imbalance may be seen as natural. However, the switch may have di¤erent interpretations depending on how he constructs his identity or the esteem he expects from the listeners. As hinted on in the introduction, it might be intended to convince the francophone MPs of his bipartisan and national stance as far as the anglophone-francophone divide is concerned. It is like saying, ‘I speak both languages, so I care about you all equally’. It may also be claimed that he switches to French because it is the language of the more powerful group. In switching to French, the PM does not only adopt this new identity but perpetuates French as the language of power. Again, in positioning himself as a bilingual PM of a bilingual country, this switch can be seen as perfectly aligning with that position of a PM. Taking exigencies of context into account, it could also be argued that the switch to French is to accommodate to the needs of the MP who asked the question in the first place. The question is asked by MP Njoya (1C). The PM might therefore have considered it proper to respond to the question in the language in which it was asked. A reason for this may be that

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

151

he wants to ward o¤ pre-emptively any criticisms that may arise, given that MP Njoya is from an opposition party. However, the fact that he continues in French even after this question is answered indicates what is at stake is not only the courtesy he owes the MP whose question he answers. It has to do with the larger national platform of power balance on which he, as PM, has a big role to play. The PM’s linguistic choices contrast grossly with the Speaker’s, who always responds to MPs in French irrespective of whether they spoke in English or French. This gives the impression, false it may be, that anglophone MPs are implicitly supposed to switch to French if they want to be taken seriously while francophone MPs need not bother to use English, except perhaps when something is at stake and the support of anglophone MPs is indispensable (3). As (3) shows, some francophone MPs do speak English, not because they want to be taken seriously but because they want to flatter or impress their anglophone colleagues in a bid to convince them to support a bill or law. MP Evina’s turn below ends with a passionate plea in English. It is not a reinterpretation of what she has said in French but an appeal apparently directly at anglophone MPs. It is an inclusive strategy that tries to pull the anglophones into the position she holds, as far as the law in question is concerned. (3) MP EVINA: Ce projet, dont l’importance n’est plus a` de´montrer car il conciliait deux syste`mes en vigueur jusque la` . . . Ce projet de loi . . . vient renforcer l’unite´ et l’inte´gration nationales. Il me´rite que nous le votions tre`s rapidement afin qu’il [puisse] eˆtre promulgue´ par le Chef de l’E´tat et afin qu’il soit applique´ rapidement pour le be´ne´fice des Camerounais. May I therefore appeal on the entire chamber to unanimously vote this important law which comes in support of our young democracy? Thank you very much. She is, therefore, assuming an identity which is normally not hers, for specific purposes. The switch is not like the PM’s, which is arguably triggered by the MP’s question which is in French. This therefore confirms the fact that linguistic, social and political identities in Cameroon are fluctuative and dependent on contextual demands. This might be because in this multilingual space, as said earlier, individuals tend to find themselves in perpetual conflict between their self-chosen identities and others’ attempts to position them di¤erently. In this connection, we could say the ex-

152

Lilian Lem Atanga

colonial identities, i.e. anglophone and francophone, are imposed identities (colonialism imposed these languages); switching to French or English according to situational requirements results in assumed identities (people generally fall back to their original o‰cial language identity afterwards); belonging to one political party rather than another is a matter of negotiable identities (party members cross carpets to other parties); and portraying oneself as bilingual in French and English is a matter of displayed identities, since, as a matter of fact, this is the identity all Cameroonians are expected to abide by (see Table 2 below). Subject positioning (Blackledge 2005) in the negotiation of identities (Wodak 2003) is important in perpetuating, challenging, resisting or contesting imposed or assumed identities. With regard to positioning, the PM displays his identity as a real Cameroonian when he speaks both o‰cial languages. MP Evina assumes the anglophone identity in the closing lines of her intervention, but MPs Mbaya and Njoya stay faithful to their imposed (though original) identities in their choice of language. The choices discussed so far are summarised in Table 2. What is noticeable is the fact that certain people who wield political power apparently put themselves above the ideal bilingual identity of the country, i.e. the displayed identity. The Speaker, for instance, does not adopt this ideal national identity typified by bilingualism in his turns in the way the PM does. This is perhaps because he is the boss of the house. But in relation to the PM, it becomes clear that identities are multi-layered: why does the PM (who normally has more political power) use both languages and the Speaker does not? There are two possible ways to explain this: 1) The former is an anglophone and so needs to reach out to the other group since it is the larger or more powerful group. His imposed identity and displayed identity merge. 2) He represents the government and has to please the MPs so that they pass government bills. Here, he is benefiting from an assumed identity while at the same time performing his displayed identity. These di¤erent facets could be seen in Table 2, which shows overlaps in the identity types. Speakers could belong to more than one, depending on how they discursively present themselves. The explanations above are not fixed. It is di‰cult to say exactly what happens in the minds of multilingual speakers when they move from one language to another. This is the more complicated for Cameroonians who grow up from speaking two or more languages.

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

153

Table 2. Identities in the Cameroonian parliament Type of identity

Major features

Identity carriers

Imposed identities

– Anglophones vs. francophones – Imposed by (colonial) history – O‰cial markers of distinction and separation

– Anglophones – Francophones – Use of English or French

Assumed identities

– Switching language in specific situations – Taking on the other identity group for beneficial reasons

– Francophones to flatter anglophones – All for bipartisan support

Negotiated identities

– Crossing party lines – Negotiating across ideological boundaries – Talking over ethnic di¤erences

– Political parties – Ethnic groups – Religious a‰liation (esp. Muslims vs. Christians)2

Displayed identities

– Abiding by what is expected of all – Being bilingual

– Anglophones tend to be more bilingual

6. Language choice and national concerns In parliament, not all topics are handled along party lines. There are certain topics that cut across political parties, and MPs know that they need to collaborate on these. Such topics include voting bills on issues that directly concern the population, for instance, education, prices of goods, and provision of jobs. In (4), MP Tasi reacts to the way parliamentarians are made to work. They are always under pressure from the government. For him, this is an unfair treatment, as he concludes his turn by saying that ‘‘the horse/rider 2. Although this does not constitute part of the study, religious identity undertones are prevalent in Cameroon and are negotiated in parliamentary or political discourses. The northern part of the country is predominantly Muslim while the south is Christian. Political convenience alliances such as Le Grand Nord take advantage of the religious homogeneity of the three northern regions to unite people along political lines.

154

Lilian Lem Atanga

relationship between the executive and the legislature should come to an end’’. He is looking through a volume of proposals from the government for deliberation in the parliament. He has spotted some typos and grave translation problems and decides to take the vice prime minister to task for them. He is concerned about the policy of bilingualism and how it functions in the parliament and, by extension, in the rest of the country. He is definitely unhappy with the linguistic performance of translators and interpreters who work in the parliament and in government ministries. He however does not blame them but rather the government that constantly puts them under pressure. He therefore builds two camps or groups. His goal is not to defend a particular party or to lay blame on a particular party represented in parliament. He rather chooses to attack the government and the entire system which works by putting people under pressure. According to him, what counts for the government is that MPs rapidly vote on any bill submitted to them. This, he believes, is worse than mediocrity, and is similar to the pressure placed on translators and interpreters who end up producing inaccurate translations. (4) MP TASI: I want to tell you the tedious task of listening to what may sound like bad English or bad French but what I note is that the average Cameroonian interpreter is a person who is solid and good but he operates within what context? Crash programmes: ‘apporte-nous ce document la` dans deux jours’; get this thing ready for us in one week. [. . .] Mr vice . . . His Excellency the Vice Prime Minister, I know what the Anglo-Saxons will call the executive system or the cabinet system, translated on the continent to mean ‘solidarite´ gouvernementale’ which in most cases is a principle. I say this ‘‘en connaissant le post’’. I know that you will feel bad that somebody is sitting somewhere and waiting to see whether there is a project voted since that is the message in this country ‘‘est-ce que c’etait vote´?’’. . . If we do this we will be proud Cameroonians. As I said, if we do the contrary then tomorrow some people look at us and laugh at us. They will say ‘Tasi, you were there, isn’t it?’ They will say, ‘honorable Ndongo Essomba, vous e´tiez la`, n’est-ce pas ?’. . . The horse/rider relationship between the executive and the legislature should come to an end. Here, MP Tasi constructs an identity that includes all MPs as belonging to the parliament, and sets it against the government, represented in the

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

155

audience by the ministers and the PM. This inclusive identity gives him the leverage to talk for all MPs about a topic that is of national importance. To be sure he is accepted as speaking for the rest, and for the rest to accept to belong to the identity group he is constructing; he switches to French when he refers to a French-speaking MP, ‘‘honorable Ndongo Essomba, vous e´tiez la`, n’est-ce pas?’’ He continues in English when he refers to himself, being an English-speaking MP thus: ‘‘Tasi, you were there, isn’t it?’’ Again, to show that the government belongs to an opposite identity group, he uses some of the hackneyed phrases government o‰cials use; ‘‘apporte-nous ce document la` dans deux jours’’, ‘‘est-ce que c’etait vote´?’’ By introducing phrases of his own in French and by translating some of the phrases he uses in French into English, the speaker demonstrates the identity that all Cameroonians are expected to abide by: the displayed identity based on bilingualism. This is similar to what the PM does but more profound because he is not substantially compelled by certain contextual exigencies as the PM is in his turns in (1) above. Again, identities are not stable; they are created and recreated according to demands of topic and context.

7. Defending cultural and linguistic identities As mentioned earlier, the parliament, like the rest of Cameroon, handles issues related to the equality of anglophones and francophones with a lot of care. This is because it is a thorny ground; cf. the incident involving MP Paulinus Jua quoted above. So, francophone MPs know that their anglophone colleagues, irrespective of political background, are ready to join in solidarity on anything that threatens their belonging together as anglophones. The defence of linguistic identities, whether o‰cial language identity or ethnic language identity, generally takes place in two ways: 1) by directly referring to the identity group and identifying the improper treatment it has received (7) and (9), and 2) referring to the geographical region of the linguistic group in a bid to show how it has been disfavoured by government policies (8). Both strategies are reminiscent of those of the anglophones who, representing the minority o‰cial language group, could be said to be marginalized. Cognizant of this, the House Speaker in the following excerpt (5) avoids using the identity laden terms anglophone and francophone but nevertheless makes us know he avoids them consciously. This mitigating strategy is intended to place him (the Speaker) on neutral ground where

156

Lilian Lem Atanga

neither the francophones nor the anglophones can accuse him of perpetuating his own identity. (5) SPEAKER: Merci, Monsieur le Ministre d’E´tat. La parole est maintenant a` Monsieur Banadzem. Pour moi, Honorable est un mot anglais et Monsieur est un franc¸ais, je ne dis pas un francophone, mais un franc¸ais (laughter). Worthy of note here is that the above turn takes place after a francophone minister has spoken in French and the next speaker (MP Banadzem) is an anglophone MP and is normally expected to speak in English. And he does speak in English (6). His question, interestingly, has nothing to do with the anglophone-francophone divide hinted at in the Speaker’s turn. It is on a neutral or common topic, that of unfinished contracts awarded by government. (6) MP BANADZEM: Mr Minister of state, we want to know if there is an inventory of abandoned projects in your ministry and if there isn’t, it would be good that there is really an inventory in your ministerial department. Finally, can these projects be completed for the well-being of the population of this country? Thank you. By avoiding the common thorny issue of anglophones vs. francophones in his question and rather tackling a problem common to both groups, MP Banadzem portrays an in-house, common MP identity. He pits this identity against the government by challenging the latter to make an inventory of projects awarded to contractors. The MP therefore foregrounds the common interest in his question above linguistic and party lines. It is not an anglophone or francophone issue but one that concerns Cameroon. He is therefore speaking for all irrespective of party or linguistic belonging. In (7), MP Anyangwe adopts a similar strategy even though he focuses on a cultural issue of relevance to ethnic groups, i.e. ethnolinguistic identity. The issue he raises a¤ects many ethnic groups irrespective of whether they are in the francophone or anglophone part of the country. French would have been the better choice here if he wanted to reach more listeners since most MPs and ministers are francophone. Speaking in English, perhaps to emphasise his resentment and objection to French and francophone identity (since anglophones are considered to be prone to oppose or revolt), he complains that traditional dances and religious choirs shown

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

157

on national television are from specific regions or ethnic groups. He deplores the fact that the over 300 ethnicities in Cameroon do not identify culturally with this audio-visual facility. He implicitly makes reference to the religious choir of the former manager of the Cameroon Radio Television Corporation (CRTV): ‘‘Last year we lived an unacceptable situation. It was always the same choir that passes over the screen’’, but does not relate this to the anglophone-francophone divide, even though the choir and traditional dances were from a francophone church and region respectively. (7) MP ANYANGWE: Thank you, Mr President for giving me the floor. I am happy that the minister of communication is in the house to answer this question that I had asked last year [. . .] For so many years, I have never seen the traditional dance from my area called Etybi shown over the CRTV, nor any other group from my village being shown over the national television. We often have the impression that CRTV focuses its attention on a specific group of the Cameroonian population. Last year we lived an unacceptable situation. It was always the same choir that passes over the screen and one tends to ask why the same choir over television [. . .] We have over 300 ethnic groups with a rich and diversified cultural heritage which your ministry should be in charge of managing its activities for the promotion of the national culture. Cameroonians are consequently obliged to watch or listen to only some choirs, some traditional groups, and we decry this monotony. MP Anyangwe in the above excerpt uses his imposed identity as an anglophone to signal his objection to the projection of choirs and dances from a particular ethnic group or region on national television. He wants the country’s more than 300 ethnic groups to be represented on television as well. His argument is in a way an extension of the anglophones’ general cry that the national radio and television allocate far too less time to programmes in English (see The Buea Declaration, 1993). However, the fight for the common goal in (6) and (7) does not obtain in (8) and (9). MP Fosso is certainly touching on issues that have to do with the anglophones, and as an anglophone, he decides to maintain his imposed, non-negotiable identity in order to give more weight to his message. There is no other way of putting it since those against whom his claim is built are not an ethnic group but the predominantly francophone government. In (8), he uses the second strategy identified above to defend his linguistic identity: by making reference to his geographical region

158

Lilian Lem Atanga

and the unequal treatment it has received: ‘‘Soa has grown and is now a University; Mbengwi is yet to start. . .’’ (8) MP FOSSO: In 1980, yes, he signed a decree creating two international institutes, two international institutes, one based in Soa [francophone part], the other based in Mbengwi [anglophone part]. Reason, the one based in Soa to take care of French-speaking Cameroonians and other speakers of the French language who like to study in English. President Ahmadou Ahidjo created two international institutions for the training of technical teachers. It is a sad situation but it is annoying that for 25 years Soa has grown and is now a University, Mbengwi is yet to start . . . Mr Minister, Sir . . . (laughter from the other MPs, saying ‘‘She is a madam’’) In a later turn, after a brief interruption by other MPs when he refers to the female minister as ‘Mr Minister, Sir’, he moves from the unequal treatment in development projects in francophone and anglophone areas to the unequal use of both o‰cial languages in government transactions. Even though it is clear that he is talking about texts not being translated into English, he however mitigates his accusation: ‘‘the two languages should come out when there is a text, an English version and a French version’’. His position is discernible from his choice of language, and anyone familiar with the system (like he is) already knows it is to anglophone journalists that he attributes the line, ‘‘we are sorry, there is no o‰cial translation’’. (9) MP FOSSO: We are trying to make up our budding democracy to make sure it goes well. . . here journalists of CRTV constantly need to apologise because it is news time and they say ‘I am translating from a text that just came in, texts should have o‰cial translations’. Mr Speaker, I will like to suggest. . . , I will like to move that from now on, please, the two languages should come out when there is a text, an English version and a French version. . . . We are trying to do something to teach people lessons because the programmes for bilingual studies are important. We will like that to be extended to other ministries, because we do not like to hear a journalist say, ‘we are sorry, there is no o‰cial translation’. Mr Speaker, I will like to see a sector dedicated to the translation of o‰cial texts.

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

159

Although the examples given above show only how anglophone MPs defend their identity and attack o¤enders of the identity group, similar situations could be found for the francophones. The Paulinus Jua incident quoted about is an example in point. However, this does not fall within the scope of this chapter. It is, notwithstanding, a suitable direction for further research in language choice and identity construction in the Cameroonian parliament.

8. Conclusions This chapter has examined language choice and identity construction and reconstruction in the parliament in Cameroon. It has shown how especially anglophone (and also francophone) Cameroonian MPs and ministers construct their multiple (linguistic, ethnic, political) identities. The common tendency in most of the examples analysed here is that anglophone MPs choose language for two reasons: to include other MPs who normally do not belong to the anglophone identity group and to exclude them, hence placing them in the opposite group against which criticism is directed. When inclusion takes place, the other MPs are built into the ingroup, most generally either representing the parliament or incorporating the entire country. This depends on the topics handled. So, anglophone and francophone MPs adopt di¤erent strategies to include or exclude each other. Interestingly, during inclusion, anglophone MPs tend to adopt some French expressions into their turns or talk about topics that unite or transcend the o‰cial language divide. In situations of exclusion, the language used by anglophone MPs is almost always English and the topics are generally connected to the use of English, development in the anglophone zone or treatment of anglophones in di¤erent domains of national life. On the part of the francophones, language choice, especially a switch to English, is generally to impress the anglophones and coax them into supporting a course or a bill. So, for francophone MPs, using English is not really inclusion but rather a form of reaching out to the anglophone MPs in times of need. Moreover, most of them are not bilingual. Sticking only to French as the Speaker does could also be interpreted as a display of power, not being ready to assume or display any other identity as other MPs and even the PM do. So, the two main linguistic identities (anglophones and francophones) in the parliament often compete with each other. Most of the MPs tend

160

Lilian Lem Atanga

to enact their primary o‰cial language identity; they stick to their nonnegotiable identities (as being born an anglophone or francophone)3, adopt an assumed identity (using the other o‰cial language which is not their OL1), or simply displaying a bilingual English-French identity. On strength of the choice of language, speakers could be said to be portraying their ‘francophoneness’, ‘anglophoneness’ or ‘Cameroonianness’ depending on which identity they want to project and on the context and participants involved. This choice ties in with what Tabouret-Keller (1998: 316) says of the dynamics of identities: At any given time a person’s identity is a heterogeneous set made up of all the names or identities, given and taken up by her. But in a lifelong process, identity is endlessly created anew, according to very various social constraints (historical, institutional, economic, etc.), social interactions, and wishes that may happen to be very subjective and unique.

The ethnolinguistic identities of the MPs and ministers are suppressed within the context of the parliament since no texts were produced in any indigenous Cameroonian language, nor were any instances of code switching or code mixing involving an indigenous language recorded. But these identities are certainly produced and reconstructed in other contexts outside the parliament in ways similar to the comment by Tabouret-Keller (1998) above. MP Anyangwe’s turn in (7) about the predominance of dances from one ethnic group underlies the fact that such ethnic identities are constructed on the national stage, and are or should be countered, as he does, in national circles like the parliament. The linguistic choices MPs make in the parliament are a microcosm of the choices Cameroonians make in their daily life. They voluntarily decide to, or are forced to, or find it appropriate to, use one language rather than another in di¤erent contexts, when dealing with di¤erent topics, and for many other di¤erent reasons. This in a way is the common character of average Cameroonians: to switch between several languages as demands 3. Current trends within the Cameroonian society, however, show that these o‰cial language boundaries are shifting as born Francophones may end up becoming Anglophones. So the divide between the Anglophones and Francophones has become fluid and di¤erentiable mostly on basis of geographical origin, i.e. a Francophone may either be someone from one of the eight Francophone regions or someone who attended the French system of education (and vice versa). For recent surveys on this, see Anchimbe (2005) and Fonyuy (2010).

Language choice, identity, and power in the Cameroonian parliament

161

of topic, context, and participants come up (see Anchimbe’s (2006) notion of identity opportunism). However, with the growing interest in English by the francophones, some aspects of the trends in language choice identified in the parliament are expected to change. In the last ten years, there have been considerable changes in the francophones’ negative attitudes towards English. More and more of them are ready to express themselves in English and are scrambling to send their children to English-medium schools. If this should continue undisturbed for several years, we might see bilingualism take hold of the parliament. This does not mean identity construction on party lines and linguistic basis will disappear – it will only change into another form but maintaining its original motivations.

References Anchimbe, Eric A. 2005. Anglophonism and francophonism: The stakes of (o‰cial) language identity in Cameroon. Alize´s 25–26: 7–26. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2006. Hybrid linguistic identities in postcolonial Africa: The intricacy of identity opportunism in multilingual Cameroon. In: Heidemann, Frank and Alfonso de Toro (eds.), New Hybridities: Societies and Cultures in Transition. Leipzig: Olms. 237–261. Anchimbe, Eric A. 2007. Linguabridity: Redefining linguistic identities among children in urban areas. In: Anchimbe, Eric A. (ed.), Linguistic Identity in Postcolonial Multilingual Spaces. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 66– 86. Antaki, Charles and Sue Widdecombe (eds.). 1998. Identities in Talk. London: Sage. Bamberg, Michael. 2004. Narrative discourse and identities. In: Meister, Jan Christoph (ed.), Narratology beyond Literary Criticism. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 213–237. Bamberg, Michael. 2005. Agency. In: Herman, David, Manfred Jahn and MarieLaure Ryan, (eds.), The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Narrative Theory. New York: Routledge. 9–10. Bamberg, Michael. 2005. Master narratives. In: Herman, David, Manfred Jahn and Marie-Laure Ryan, (eds.), The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Narrative Theory. New York: Routledge. 287–288. Bamberg, Michael. 2005. Positioning. In: Herman, David, Manfred Jahn and Marie-Laure Ryan (eds.), The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Narrative Theory. New York: Routledge. 445–446. Bamberg, Michael, Anna De Fina and Deborah Schi¤rin (eds.). 2007. Selves and Identities in Narrative and Discourse Studies. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

162

Lilian Lem Atanga

Blackledge, Adrian. 2005. Discourse and Power in a Multilingual World. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Blackledge, Adrian and Aneta Pavlenko. 2001. Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. International Journal of Bilingualism 5(3): 243–257. Block, David. 2006. Multilingual Identities in a Global City: London Stories. Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan. Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen and Rick Iedema (eds.). 2008. Identity Troubles: Critical Discourse and Contestations of Identification. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Davies, Bronwyn and Rom Harre´. 1990. Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour 20(1): 43–63. De Celia, Rudolf, Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak. 1999. The discursive construction of national identities. Discourse & Society 10(2): 149–173. De Fina, Anna, Deborah Schi¤rin and Michael Bamberg (eds.). 2006. Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Echu, George. 1999. Le bilinguisme o‰ciel au Cameroun: Critiques et perspectives. In: Echu, George and Allan W. Grundstrom (eds.), O‰cial Bilingualism and Linguistic Communication in Cameroon. New York. Peter Lang. 189–202. Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. London: Polity Press. Fairclough, Norman. 2001. Language and Power. London: Longman. Krzyz˙anowski, Michal and Ruth Wodak. 2008. Multiple identities, migration and belonging: Voices of migrants. In: Caldas-Coulthard and Iedema (eds.), pp. 95– 119. Leeuwen, Theo van. 1996. The representation of social actors. In: Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen and Malcolm Coulthard (eds.), Texts and Practices. London: Routledge. 32–70. Mbangwana, Paul N., Kizitus Mpoche and Tennu Mbuh (eds.). 2006. Language, Literature and Identity. Go¨ttingen: Cuvillier. Pavlenko, Aneta and Adrian Blackledge (eds.). 2004. Negotiation of Identities in Multilingual Settings. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Tabouret-Keller, Andre´e. 1998. Language and identity. In: Coulmas, Florian (ed.), Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 315–326. Tamanji, Pius N. 2008. A success story in o‰cial bilingualism: Lessons for mother-tongue based multilingual education programme in Cameroon. Revue Internationale des Arts, Lettres et Sciences Sociales (RIALLS) 1(2): 151–171. Wodak, Ruth (ed.). 1989. Language, Power and Ideology: Studies in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Wodak, Ruth. 2001. The discourse-historical approach. In: Wodak, Ruth and Michael Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. 63–94. Wodak, Ruth. 2003. Multiple identities: The roles of female parliamentarians in the EU Parliament. In: Holmes, Janet and Miriam Meyerho¤ (eds.), The Handbook of Gender and Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 671–698. Wodak, Ruth, Rudolph de Cillia, Martin Reisigl and Karin Liebhart. 1999. The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Part II. Cameroon Pidgin English: Properties and history

Signboard at the University of Buea, Cameroon

Chapter 8 Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English Anne Schro¨der 1. Introduction The tense and aspect systems of particular Pidgins and Creoles, as well as of Pidgins and Creoles in general, have been the subject of a number of publications (cf. e.g. Singler 1990, Youssef 1995, 2003, Lefebvre 1996, Winford 1996a, 2000, Sidnell 2002, to name but a few). As Sidnell points out: ‘‘An exhaustive listing of works on tense-aspect in pidgin and creole languages [. . .] would constitute its own independent bibliographic project’’ (2002: 151–152, fn.2). Creole verb systems have been of special interest in discussions of the genesis of these languages, as well as of prototypical Creole grammars and their role in the study of language universals (Winford 1993: 25). The tense and aspect system of Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE), however, has received comparatively little attention. But, although tense and aspect in CPE have rarely been at the centre of a publication,1 descriptions of the tense and aspect forms of CPE can be found in a number of publications which describe the structure of this language in general. In this chapter, I will first present the treatment of tense and aspect in these earlier descriptions of CPE structure. Subsequently, I will use a language-independent method to investigate tense and aspect in CPE, i.e. ¨ sten Dahl’s (1985) Tense-Mood-Aspect (TMA) questionnaire. Finally, O on the basis of the data from the two approaches a new description of tense and aspect in CPE will be proposed.

2. Descriptions of tense and aspect in CPE in previous publications Although in her account of CPE morphology and syntax Ayafor (2008: 448) claims that ‘‘much of the published research [. . .] on Kamtok [i.e. 1. To my knowledge, Schro¨der (2003a) is the only publication dealing exclusively with the aspect system of CPE.

166

Anne Schro¨der

CPE] has been of a sociolinguistic nature’’ and that ‘‘[v]ery little has been done in the field of linguistic description’’, structural descriptions of this language have been available since the first, mainly structural, work by Schneider in 1966. Other, also mainly structural, descriptions followed, e.g. Dwyer (1966), Todd (1969, 1991), Gilman (1972), Mbassi-Manga (1973), Bellama et al. (1983), Fe´ral (1989), some of which, however, are teaching manuals.2 The first description of CPE available is Schneider (1966), the work of a missionary who had spent 14 years in anglophone Cameroon. He seems to have been his own principal informant and has been accused of merely providing a survey of his own idiolect of Pidgin (cf. Todd 1971). Schneider identifies the following tense and aspect markers in CPE: bin and go are described as time auxiliaries, marking past and future time respectively (p. 69); di is referred to as an imperfect aspect auxiliary, indicating progressing or continuing action, and referring to present time in the absence of any time auxiliary (p. 70). Finally, Schneider identifies a fourth marker, i.e. don, as a perfect auxiliary, marking an action as completed and having neba as its negated form (p. 71).3 Dwyer’s (1966) teaching manual for Peace Corps volunteers working in Cameroon appeared in the same year as Schneider’s thesis and the author seems to have been familiar with Schneider’s work. Dwyer identifies a similar set of tense and aspect markers in CPE. Di and don are referred to as aspect markers indicating continuing or habitual and completed actions respectively, but Dwyer stresses the fact that CPE and Standard English (SE) use di¤erent systems, hence ‘‘the necessity for using the same gloss for don and di in certain contexts’’ (Dwyer 1966: 114). Dwyer explicitly states that neither don nor di are tense markers, giving no information whatsoever about when the action takes place (p. 114), as opposed to go and bin, analysed as future time and past time markers respectively (p. 132). Nevertheless, Dwyer notes that present tense is normally indicated by the use of the aspect marker di, as in i di chop fufu (‘he is eating fufu’) (p. 132–133). 2. For short descriptions and evaluations of these works, cf. Schro¨der (2003b: 18–22). 3. I have simplified the di¤erent forms and spellings proposed for the various markers, i.e. I have consistently used don, where authors may have used dong or dn; I have used di for all instances despite the fact that some authors spell de or dey; I have used bin for bin and bi. I am aware that these di¤erent spellings reflect (regional) di¤erences in pronunciation of the markers, but I do not believe that they reflect di¤erences in function.

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

167

In her 1969 thesis, Todd identifies separate ‘‘words used as markers of time’’, i.e. ‘‘auxiliaries used to indicate time relations’’ (p. 117). She describes two methods of indicating present time reference: the unmarked base form of a verb, referred to as Simple Present and constructions with di referred to as Present Progressive (p. 129). She reports that the latter form is more frequently employed (p. 130), and is used to indicate habitual and progressive, ongoing, durative actions (p. 131). Di can also be used to refer to the future, however, it adds a sense of ‘‘nothing will prevent my going’’ (p. 132), whereas go marks future time reference without overtones. Past time reference is made using don (and its negated form neba) and bin. The former refers to recent, non-continuous actions (p. 135) and to actions which ‘‘occurred in the past, but which have relevance to the present’’ (p. 136). Bin is then identified as a non-progressive auxiliary, indicating completed action, mostly of the distant past (p. 136). The title of Mbassi-Manga’s (1973) study has aptly been referred to as ‘‘a misnomer’’ (cf. Wolf 2001: 196), because it is probably the most detailed study of CPE rather than of Cameroon English, as it suggests. However, with regard to the tense and aspect system of CPE, MbassiManga takes a daring but – in my view – wrong approach, which is worth quoting at length: Morphological function of the Cameroon pidgin English ‘verb’ can be said to be a characteristic of the auxiliary and of two auxiliaries /de/ (infinitive), which changes its form to /bi/ for past tense, imperative mood, and present (tense) states, and to /bin/ for past tense and perfective aspect. The form /de/ itself functions for the present tense, and for temporary and / habitual states. The other auxiliary is /di/ and it functions like SE. have. In its form /di/, it signals both the present tense and its progressive aspects and in its form /don/, it functions for both past tense and its perfective aspect. (Mbassi-Manga 1973: 161–162)

Mbassi-Manga confuses the existential/locative copula, which can take the forms dey, dei, de (and possibly di), with the preverbal marker di (which can also have the form de) and the same holds for the equative copula bi, which he seems to confuse with the preverbal marker bin, which can also have the form of bi (cf. note 3). This becomes evident when he translates duala bi mbomba as ‘the Duala are strongheaded (permanent state)’ and opposes it firstly to duala mbomba ‘the Duala are very strongheaded’ (permanent state) and secondly to ma broda bi go (‘my brother went (simple past))’ (p. 115). If the two occurrences of bi are to be seen as the same preverbal marker, then the translation of the first sentence

168

Anne Schro¨der

should be ‘the Duala were very strongheaded’. In addition, MbassiManga obviously tries to describe CPE in terms of Standard English forms (and not even functions!), hence his equation of CPE di and English have (see quotation above) and of CPE don with the English present perfect (p. 115). Bellama et al. (1983) is another Peace Corps teaching manual. They identify di as a form of ‘to be’ and as a marker of present tense (p. 11), which, however, is said to translate several English meanings, such as present progressive (action in progress) and habitual (p. 8). Go is analysed as a marker of general future tense, which – in combination with di – expresses ‘‘some kind of immediate future’’ (p. 30). They state that don is an indicator of ‘‘unspecified past’’, i.e. ‘‘the speaker wishes to express that a certain action has been done, but he/she does not situate it at any particular time’’ (p. 48). The action is said to be often recent, but could also have taken place in the distant past. In their interpretation, don is held to be very similar to the Present Perfect in English (p. 48). Bin is therefore taken to indicate specified past or Simple Past (p. 50), i.e. where the time of action is a specific one (p. 54). Fe´ral’s (1989) extensive structural description of CPE identifies two autonomous CPE systems, an anglophone and a francophone variant. When she describes the TA-systems, however, she also assumes the existence of a ‘‘minimal system’’, which constitutes the common core and should be available to all CPE-speakers (Fe´ral 1989: 128). Fe´ral identifies two tense markers, bin and go, and two aspect markers, don and di (p. 115), which stand in complementary distribution, i.e. only one of the forms bin and go can be used in a syntagm, and the same holds for di and don (p. 116). According to Fe´ral, di expresses the incompletive aspect, which, depending on the context, can have a durative, inchoative, or habitual interpretation (p. 116–117). Don, on the other hand, indicates accomplishment and can thus also have a resultative reading (p. 117). Bin and go situate an action with regard to the present moment of speaking, i.e. before this moment and thus in the past (bin) or after this moment and thus in the future (go) (p. 118–119). Todd (1991) is a language manual, which identifies di as a marker of progressing action, don as a marker suggesting an action which has ‘‘just occurred’’, bin as a marker of past time and go as suggesting the future (Todd 1991: 17). Ayafor (2000) refers to the various verbal constructions in CPE as tenses and summarises them in a table, equating di with SE simple present and present continuous, bin with SE simple past and past continuous, and

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

169

don with SE present perfect, stressing that ‘‘the simple present and the present continuous tenses are expressed in the same way in Kamtok’’ (Ayafor 2000: 6). Similarly, in Ayafor (2008), to my knowledge the most recent available description of CPE’s morpho-syntax, bin and don are identified as past markers, where bin is used to form the past simple and don to mark the recent past or present perfect, and the unspecified past (p. 441). Go is referred to as the simple future tense (p. 442), and di is only described as a marker in combination with other markers. Thus, it is said to mark the imperfect in combination with be (sic!) ‘‘to indicate actions begun in the past but not necessarily completed’’ (p. 441), for habitual actions (in the past) and for two past actions taking place simultaneously (p. 441). When combined with go ‘‘the progressive aspect of the future is obtained’’ (p. 442). And finally, in Schro¨der (2003a), I described the aspect system of CPE in terms of a universal aspect model. Di was identified as an imperfective marker and don was described as a perfective aspect marker highlighting the semantically inherent boundaries of a verb class. The descriptions of tense and aspect categories in CPE in the available publications can be summarised as follows:

Table 1. Summary of tense and aspect in CPE as described in various publications go

bin

di

don/neba

Schneider (1966)

future time auxiliary

past time auxiliary

imperfect aspect auxiliary indicating progressing or continuing action and present tense

perfect auxiliary marking a completed action

Dwyer (1966)

future time marker

past time marker

aspect marker indicating continuing or habitual action; indicator of present tense

aspect marker indicating completed action

Todd (1969)

future time auxiliary

marker of completed action frequently of the distant past

auxiliary marking durative, progressive and habitual actions; also future time reference

past time auxiliary which refers to recent, non-continuous actions; present time relevance

170

Anne Schro¨der

Table 1. Continued go

bin

di

don/neba

Mbassi-Manga (1973)

future time auxiliary

past tense, simple past; perfective aspect

present tense; progressive aspect: habitual aspect

present perfect; past tense and perfective aspect

Bellama et al. (1983)

future tense

specified past; simple past

present progressive; habitual

unspecified past tense; present perfect

Fe´ral (1989)

future tense marker, relative to the moment of speaking

past tense marker, relative to the moment of speaking

incompletive (durative, inchoative, habitual) aspect marker

completive (resultative) aspect marker

Todd (1991)

future

past

marker of progressive action

recent past

Ayafor (2000)

future tense

simple past past continuous

simple present; present continuous

present perfect

Schro¨der (2003a)

—

—

imperfective aspect marker

perfective aspect marker

Ayafor (2008)

simple future

simple past

progressive aspect; imperfect aspect; habitual aspect

recent past or present perfect; unspecified past

On the basis of the foregoing account, it seems that four markers of tense and aspect are relevant in CPE. These are go as a future marker, bin as an anterior or past marker, di as an imperfective (progressive, continuous, habitual) marker and don with its negated form neba as a perfective or perfect marker. While there seems to be little disagreement with regard to the classification of go and bin as tense markers, with future or past time reference respectively, di and don receive a greater variety of labels in the di¤erent descriptions. In addition, a number of authors note that CPE tenses are relative, not absolute (e.g. Todd 1969: 130), and that once the time has been established in e.g. a narrative, further tense indications are redundant and may not be made (e.g. Bellama et al. 1983: 81–82). Some authors also make mention of the combination of don with bin, to which they refer explicitly as Past Perfect (e.g. Bellama et al. 1983: 90, Ayafor

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

171

2000: 6, 2008: 441) or which they seem implicitly to analyse as such (e.g. Schneider 1966: 71). Todd carefully states of this combination that it implies ‘‘that the action occurred before, but is relevant to a time in the past’’ (1969: 137).4 In sum, CPE structure seems to closely resemble those other Creoles, which, in addition to the three preverbal markers typical of the Creole Prototype, for anterior (past), posterior (future) and imperfective,5 have an additional marker, frequently labelled as completive (e.g. Hackert 2004: 76). However, as can be seen from the account in the preceding paragraphs, many of the attempts to describe the tense and aspect system of CPE take a position which I would refer to as ‘Anglicist’, i.e. they describe the CPEsystem in terms of Standard English and frequently try to equate CPE forms with SE tenses. This is clearly unsatisfactory, as a language should be described on its own terms, which is why I will now describe CPE with the help of a language-independent method.

3. Investigating tense and aspect in CPE with Dahl’s TMA questionnaire 3.1. The questionnaire and data collection The data discussed in the following sections were elicited from 15 Cameroonians in Cameroon, representing a cross-section of the educated population.6 Although CPE may be more frequently used by less educated Cameroonians, the design of the study required a certain amount of formal education and aimed at the acrolectal variant of CPE. The data were collected with the help of a reduced version7 of a questionnaire ¨ sten Dahl (1985). Dahl used this TMA questionoriginally developed by O naire to investigate tense and aspect in 64 languages, from various genetic 4. Other combinations are also mentioned but it is not within the scope of the present paper to discuss these in any detail. 5. A summary of the Creole Prototype is given in the Appendix, although ‘‘[t]he growing literature on this area of creole grammar has made it abundantly clear that no creole conforms exactly to a single ‘prototypical’ system’’ (Winford 2000: 437). 6. See Table 10 in the Appendix for more detailed information on the informants. 7. The original questionnaire was considered too time-consuming for the informants and was therefore reduced in order to guarantee a good number of returns. This is why not all sentences eliciting prototypical occurrences of a particular verbal category figure on this reduced version of the questionnaire.

172

Anne Schro¨der

groups throughout the world, and his study has been described as ‘‘one of the most influential contributions to the study of tense, mood and aspect’’ (Bache 1995: 36). It has been successfully applied to Creole languages, for example, in Hackert’s (2004) study on Bahamian Creole. The advantage of this questionnaire is that the elicitation of all relevant tense and aspect categories is assured, while a time-consuming search for appropriate written and spoken texts for the analysis of these categories can be avoided. The questionnaire consists of isolated sentences and short connected texts in English, which are accompanied by indications of the contexts in which these sentences or texts are assumed to be produced. Informants are asked to translate these sentences and texts into the language under investigation. The predicate is always given in the infinitive, thus avoiding or at least minimising literal translations of English tense and aspect categories (cf. Dahl 1985: chapter 2). This methodology has been judged especially suitable for the investigation of the semantics and pragmatics of TMA categories and of Creole TMA systems (Winford 1996b: 321). For the present study, the data were collected through writing, and the questionnaire was handed to the informants, who filled it in at their homes without any assistance from the author of this article. 3.2. Results and evaluation In the following, Table 1 above will be taken as a starting point in the sense that the verbal categories mentioned in the various publications as descriptions of the tense and aspect markers in CPE will be taken as universal categories8 (e.g. PERFECT or PAST9). I will look at the translations provided by the informants for those sentences of the TMA questionnaire which, according to Dahl (1985) himself, are likely to elicit prototypical uses of these universal categories. I will start with the two preverbal markers for which there seems to be comparatively little disagreement with regard to their classification, i.e. go and bin.

8. I am well aware that this approach may lead to some kind of circularity, as only those categories are investigated which are mentioned in extant publications. Any neglected additional functions of these preverbal markers will necessarily also be overlooked in the present investigation. In addition, Dahl’s category divisions and hence his definitions and distinctions are accepted unquestioned. 9. I follow Dahl in writing cross-linguistic categories in capital letters.

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

173

3.2.1. Preverbal go In the various publications, preverbal go is unanimously referred to as a future marker (see section 2 above, particularly Table 1). According to Dahl, ‘‘when we talk about the future, we are either talking about someone’s plans, intentions or obligations, or we are making a prediction or extrapolation from the present state of the world’’ (1985: 103). Furthermore, he considers ‘‘the most typical uses of FUT[URE] [to] involve actions that are planned by the agent of the sentence’’ while cases of pure predictions [PRED] are taken to be rarer (1985: 105). The two prototypical categories to be examined when investigating the status of preverbal go in CPE are therefore FUTURE and PREDICTIVE. 3.2.1.1 Prototypical uses of the category FUTURE According to Dahl (1985: 107), prototypical occurrences of the universal category FUTURE can be elicited by the sentences 152, 103, 27, 104, 15, 36, 22, and 23. Since I worked with a reduced version of the original questionnaire, Sentence 27 was not included in the present study.10 (152)11 [Said by a young man] When I GROW old, I BUY a big house (103) [The boy is expecting a sum of money] When the boy GET the money, he BUY a present for the girl (104) [The boy thinks that he will perhaps get a sum of money] If the boy GET the money, he BUY a present for the girl (15) [Q: What your brother DO if you don’t go to see him today, do you think? A:] He WRITE a letter (to me) (36) [It’s no use trying to swim in the lake tomorrow] The water BE COLD (then) (22) [Q: What are you planning to do right now? A:] I WRITE letters (23) [Q: What are you planning to do right now? A:] I WRITE a letter The second verbs in sentence 152, sentence 103 and sentence 104 are almost unanimously translated with the preverbal marker go. There is one instance of marking with the modal wan (‘want’) and another single instance of 10. See note 7. In the following, when listing exemplar sentences for prototypical occurrences of a category, I will only list those which were actually part of the reduced questionnaire I used in the present study. 11. Numbers refer to the numbers given to the sentences in the original study, in Dahl (1985: 198–206). The context in which the sentence is supposed to be uttered is given in parentheses.

174

Anne Schro¨der

marking with di. The same goes for sentence 15, which most informants translated with simple go. Two informants translated the sentence with di and one with bin. Sentence 36 triggered more varied translations but the majority of the informants (11 out of 14) used go, although five of these combined it with di, bi or both. There were two instances of marking with bi only (possibly triggered by the original sentence)12 and single occurrences of single di and zero marking. In sentences 22 and 23, go was again preferred in just over half the translations (8), (for one informant in combination with a preceding di);13 five informants used the modal wan and two used the construction di plan fo rait, probably triggered by the given context. These 7 prototypical occurrences of the cross-linguistic category FUTURE and the preferred uses of CPE forms can be summarised in Table 2: Table 2. Prototypical occurrences of FUTURE14 Sentence No.

CPE translations

152 (verb 103 (verb 104 (verb 15 (verb 36 (verb 22 (verb 23 (verb

go go go go go / (go þ bi15) / (go þ di) go / (wan) / (di plan fo) go / (wan) / (di plan fo)

2) 2) 2) 1) 1) 1) 1)

3.2.1.2. Prototypical uses of the category PREDICTIVE According to Dahl (1985: 111), prototypical occurrences of the universal category PREDICTIVE, can be elicited by the sentences 16, 17, and 36. (16) [Q: What your brother DO when we arrive, do you think? ¼ What activity will he be engaged in?)] He WRITE letters (17) [Q: What your brother DO when we arrive, do you think? ¼ What activity will he be engaged in?)] He WRITE a letter 12. This is why I have kept the spelling bi here, cf. note 3. 13. This ordering contradicts the ordering of preverbal markers assumed for Creole languages; see the Creole Prototype in the Appendix. 14. In this table and all the following tables, uses of the preverbal markers which I consider to be marginal are given in brackets. For reasons of readability and clarity, single occurrences of forms are completely disregarded in the tables. 15. Probably influenced by the original sentence.

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

175

(36) [It’s no use trying to swim in the lake tomorrow] The water BE COLD (then) The results for sentence 36 are discussed in the previous section. Sentences 16 and 17 triggered a number of di¤erent translations: 6 informants translated these sentences using the combination of go and di (¼i go di rait leta (dem)), but all the other translations occurred only once each and no pattern seemed to emerge. These divergent translations may be reflective of di¤erent understandings of the English text by the informants.16 If the prototypical occurrences of the category PREDICTIVE with their preferred CPE forms are summarised, we get the following picture: Table 3. Prototypical occurrences of PREDICTIVE Sentence No.

CPE translations

36 16 17

go / (go þ bi17) / (go þ di) go þ di go þ di

As Table 2 and Table 3 show, the data from the TMA questionnaire seem to confirm the analyses in previous publications (as summarised in Table 1) that preverbal go functions as a future marker in CPE and that the ‘predicted’ vs. ‘planned’ dichotomy (see above) does not seem to be relevant for the use of this preverbal marker. 3.2.2. Preverbal bin In Table 1, bin is unanimously referred to as a PAST marker. According to Dahl (1985: 116–117), however, PAST may be indicated in several ways and seems to be a typical default-choice category, i.e. its distribution ‘‘depends largely on what is left when the other categories have taken their share of the pie’’ (p. 117). This is why Dahl does not present prototypical sentences for this category, although he introduces a PASTi category, which describes instances of PAST that are restricted to imperfective contexts and for which, according to Dahl (1985: 118–119), prototypical occurrences can be elicited by the sentences 9, 10, 20, and 171, the latter

16. Some sentences of the TMA questionnaire seem to have been ambiguous and hence seem to have triggered diverging translations. 17. Probably influenced by the original sentence.

176

Anne Schro¨der

being part of a short connected text. (9)

[A: I went to see my brother yesterday. B: What he DO? (¼What activity was he engaged in?) A:] He WRITE letters (10) [A: I went to see my brother yesterday. B: What he DO? (¼What activity was he engaged in?) A:] He WRITE a letter (20) [Q: What your brother usually DO after breakfast last summer? A:] He WRITE letters [Do you know what happened to my brother yesterday? I saw it myself.] (171) We WALK in the forest. (172) Suddenly he STEP on a snake. (173) It BITE him in the leg. (174) he TAKE a stone and THROW at the snake. (175) It DIE. The majority of the informants (8) translated these sentences using preverbal bin in combination with the marker di. Some translations with simple bin, don and di (or some combinations thereof ) were also given without any apparent pattern emerging (see note 16). The combination of bin and bi(n), however, has been described as a typical feature of francophone CPE by Fe´ral (1989: 120–121), and coincidentally, the two informants providing these combinations were, in fact, francophones.18 The preferred translations of the prototypical occurrences of the category PASTi are summarised in Table 4: Table 4. Prototypical occurrences of PASTi Sentence No.

CPE translations

9 10 20 171

bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n))

The fact that in these contexts bin is combined with di, suggests that bin can be defined as a PAST marker, while the imperfectivity of the PASTi contexts is expressed via the second preverbal marker, i.e. di. This leads us to the two remaining preverbal markers di and don, for which a greater variety of labels was found in previous descriptions of CPE.

18. Since this may actually represent a separate form of bin, I prefer the spelling bin bi(n).

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

177

3.2.3. Preverbal di In the di¤erent publications, preverbal di is variously referred to as PROGRESSIVE, HABITUAL, IMPERFECTIVE, INCOMPLETIVE and as a marker of present tense and future time reference (see Table 1). 3.2.3.1. Prototypical uses of the category PROGRESSIVE According to Dahl (1985: 92), prototypical occurrences of the category PROGRESSIVE can be elicited by the sentences 5, 6, 9, and 10. (5)

[Q: What your brother DO right now? (¼What activity is he engaged in?) A by someone who can see him:] He WRITE letters (6) [Q: What your brother DO right now? (¼What activity is he engaged in?) A by someone who can see him:] He WRITE a letter (9) [A: I went to see my brother yesterday. B: What he DO? (¼What activity was he engaged in?) A:] He WRITE letters (10) [A: I went to see my brother yesterday. B: What he DO? (¼What activity was he engaged in?) A:] He WRITE a letter

All informants except one19 translated sentences 5 and 6 with simple preverbal di, which suggests that it very likely functions as a progressive marker in CPE. In sentences 9 and 10, di was used in combination with bin by the majority of the informants (see also discussion in the previous section). These results, summarised in Table 5, suggest that di can safely be regarded as a progressive/imperfective marker in these contexts. Table 5. Prototypical occurrences of PROGRESSIVE Sentence No.

CPE translations

6 5 9 10

di di bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n))

19. The one informant (No. 9, see Table 10 in the Appendix) using don has been ignored here and in most of his other responses, as he consistently deviates from other informants and seems to overuse don, which can be interpreted as a sign of incomplete CPE knowledge. (See also Schro¨der 2003b: 233, fn. 527).

178

Anne Schro¨der

3.2.3.2. Prototypical uses of the category HABITUAL With regard to the category HABITUAL, Dahl (1985: 95 ¤.) di¤erentiates between three closely related categories: the simple HABITUAL (HAB), the HABITUAL-GENERIC (HABG), and the HABITUAL-PAST (HABPAST). The HABITUAL-GENERIC, as its name suggests, is also used in generic sentences, i.e. it exhibits the feature of lawlikeness, while the HABITUAL-PAST ‘‘is used as a label for categories which are mainly used for habitual sentences with past time reference and are not analysable as consisting of HAB or HABG combined with a regular past tense’’ (Dahl 1985: 100). Prototypical occurrences of the HAB category can be elicited by sentences 19, 18, 20, 21, 31, and 193 (Dahl 1985: 97). (18) [Q: What your brother usually DO after breakfast A:] He WRITE letters (19) [Q: What your brother usually DO after breakfast A:] He WRITE a letter (20) [Q: What your brother usually DO after breakfast last summer? A:] He WRITE letters (21) [Q: What your brother usually DO after breakfast last summer? A:] He WRITE a letter (31) [Of a visible lake, what the water is usually like] It BE COLD [I’ll tell you what happened to me sometimes when I was a child and was walking in the forest] (193) I SEE a snake. (194) I TAKE a stone and THROW at the snake. Of these, all but sentences 31 and 193, are also considered to be prototypical occurrences of the category HABG, which additionally can be elicited by sentences 73, and 191 (Dahl 1985: 99). (73) [Q: What kind of sounds do cats make? A:] They MEOW [I’ll tell you what happens to me sometimes when I am walking in the forest] (191) I SEE a snake. (192) I TAKE a stone and THROW at the snake. Finally, prototypical occurrences of the category HABPAST can be elicited by sentences 20 and 21 (see above) as well as by sentence 102 (Dahl 1985: 101). (102) [The boy used to receive a sum of money now and then] When the boy GET the money, he BUY a present for the girl 20. There was one translation with sabi (¼‘to know’).

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

179

All informants except one translated sentences 18, 19 and 73 with simple di,20 and the most frequent response for sentences 20 and 21 (5 and 7 respectively) was a combination of bin and di. There were also one and two uses of simple di and don, and 4 informants used simple bin in combination with the adverbial always, and two francophone informants the combination bin þ bi(n). (See also discussion above, section 3.2.2). Sentence 31 was translated without a preverbal marker by 7 informants, another 5 used simple di, two informants translated the sentence using a preverbal bi, which, however, is most likely to have been triggered by the original sentence. There was also a single use of the verb sabi (¼‘to know’). As regards sentence 102, 7 informants translated this sentence with simple di, and the other translations occurred only once or twice each with no rival pattern emerging (see note 16). Sentences 191 and 193 are part of a connected text, which makes the evaluation of their translations slightly more di‰cult because the context is already marked for tense (see the Creole Prototype in the Appendix). Thus in sentence 191, 6 informants did not provide any additional tense or aspect markers, while another 7 used di.21 Sentence 193 triggered a variety of translations: 5 informants used simple bin, which was also used in di¤erent combinations: bin þ don, bin þ di and the francophone variant of bin þ bi(n) by two informants each. Two informants used forms of a modal yus, one of them in combination with bin. There were also single uses of don and zero-marking. The preferred translations of the prototypical occurrences of the three HABITUAL categories are summarised in Table 6: Table 6. Prototypical occurrences of HABITUAL, HABITUAL-GENERIC, and HABITUAL-PAST Sentence No.

CPE translations

19 18 21 20 31 73 191 102 (verb 2) 193

di di bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) bin þ di / (bin þ bi(n)) Ø / di / (bi)22 di di / Ø di bin / (bin þ bi(n)) / (bin þ don) / (bin þ di) / (yus)

21. One informant used bin and another one don, see also note 19. 22. Probably influenced by original sentence.

180

Anne Schro¨der

Thus, apart from sentence 193, the preverbal marker di (or a combination of di with bin) seems to be the preferred marker to be used to express habitual and generic meanings. 3.2.3.3. Present and future time reference As shown in Table 1, some authors consider preverbal di to be a marker of present or future time reference (see also section 2). As regards the elicitation of present tense reference, Dahl (1985) does not list any sentences of his TMA questionnaire as providing prototypical occurrences of present tense. However, I believe that the verbs (195–197) in a short connected text could be considered as such since the situation described is one of simultaneity with the moment of speaking: [I’ll tell you what I see in the window right now.] (195) A boy and a girl PLAY in the street. (196) (Right now) the boy TAKE a ball and THROW it to the girl. (197) The girl THROW it back. All but one informant used preverbal di in sentence 195, while the majority of the other verbs remained unmarked, although some informants occasionally used a second di or preverbal don for some of the other verbs. However, no consistent pattern seems to emerge. In this, CPE seems to correspond to the Creole Prototype according to which verbs whose context is already marked for tense by preceding verbs or by time adverbials are not necessarily preceded by any additional tense markers. Indeed, the use of di for sentence 195 seems to suggest that di may be functioning as a present tense marker as suggested by e.g. Schneider (1966), Dwyer (1966), Mbassi-Manga (1973), and Ayafor (2000). However, the verbs in the short connected text above are all action verbs, and according to the Creole Prototype these have the inherent meaning of past (or anterior) and need to be marked for imperfectivity if they are meant to refer to the present (see also Schro¨der 2003a: 89–90). Preverbal di only occurs in combination with preverbal go in the prototypical occurrences for future time reference (see Table 2 and Table 3). The future meaning suggested by Todd (1969: 132, see also section 2 above) might therefore simply be a secondary meaning of the present progressive.23

23. Interestingly, this would compare with the English use of the present progressive for arrangements in the future (Naomi Hallan, p.c.).

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

181

Thus, CPE di seems to be primarily an imperfectivity marker, which includes the marking of progressivity and habituality, and seems to have the meanings of present and future time reference only as secondary meanings in combination with action verbs, as it cannot precede stative verbs.24 3.2.4. Preverbal don In the various sources discussed above, CPE don is referred to as a past marker, a perfect marker and a perfective marker (see Table 1). In order to re-evaluate the status of this preverbal marker in CPE, I will consider the translations provided by the informants for those sentences of the TMA questionnaire which according to Dahl (1985) are prone to elicit prototypical uses of the universal categories PERFECT, PERFECTIVE and (recent) PAST. 3.2.4.1. Prototypical uses of the category PERFECT 25 According to Dahl (1985: 131–132) prototypical occurrences of the category PERFECT are to be expected in sentences 42, 53, 54, 56, 67, and 139. (42) (53)

[Q:] You MEET my brother (any time in your life until now)? [A: I want to give your brother a book to read, but I don’t know which. Is there any of these books that he READ already? B:] (Yes,) he READ this book (54) [A: It seems that your brother never finishes books.] (That is not quite true.) He READ this book (¼all of it) (56) [Q: Is the king still alive? A:] (No,) he DIE (67) [Q: What did you find out when you came to town yesterday? A:] The king DIE (139) When I COME home (yesterday), he WRITE two letter (¼that is what he accomplished during my absence) The data elicited for sentences 42 and 53 show that the CPE informants in their translations of these two sentences preferred simple don (7 and 10 respectively). However, some informants additionally combined don with 24. According to the Creole Prototype, stative verbs carry their own specific meaning of present, and in CPE stative verbs cannot be preceded by di (see Schro¨der 2003a: 90–91). 25. I would like to thank Martin Ku¨mmel for our discussions regarding the categories PERFECT and PERFECTIVE and the results presented in the next two sections.

182

Anne Schro¨der

bin (4 and 5 respectively). There were also single translations with bin or di, and two informants did not translate sentence 42. With regard to sentences 54 and 56, 10 and 9 CPE informants used simple don. Similar to the previous sentences, we also find bin preceding don in 3 and 4 translations respectively. Two informants used bin in these contexts. Sentence 67 seems to constitute a preferred context for simple don use, although two informants used simple bin and one informant combined don with bin. This is also what the majority of the Cameroonian informants did in sentence 139, where they combined don with the anterior marker bin; only two informants used don alone and another two translated this sentence with simple bin. Thus, with regard to the prototypical occurrences of the cross-linguistic category PERFECT, the preferred uses of CPE preverbal marking in 6 prototypical instances of this category are summarised in Table 7: Table 7. Prototypical occurrences of PERFECT Sentence No.

CPE translations

53 42 54 56 67 139 (verb 2)

don / (bin þ don) don / (bin þ don) don / (bin þ don) don / (bin þ don) don bin þ don

As can be seen from this table, CPE don seems to correlate with prototypical PERFECT contexts. 3.2.4.2. Prototypical uses of the category PERFECTIVE According to Dahl (1985: 78) prototypical occurrences of the category PERFECTIVE are to be expected in sentences 91, 92, 99, 100, 101, 162, 165, 172, and 175. (91) (92) (99)

[Q: What your brother’s reaction BE when you gave him the medicine (yesterday)?] He COUGH once [Q: What your brother’s reaction BE when you gave him the medicine (yesterday)?] He COUGH twice [Q: How long did it take for your brother to finish the letter?] He WRITE the letter in an hour

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

183

(100) [The boy’s father sent him a sum money some days ago and it arrived yesterday] When the boy GET the money, he BUY a present for the girl (101) [Last year, the boy’s father sent him a sum money] When the boy GET the money, he BUY a present for the girl [Do you know what happened to me yesterday?] (161) I WALK in the forest. (162) Suddenly I STEP on a snake. (163) It BITE me in the leg. (164) I TAKE a stone and THROW at the snake. (165) It DIE. [Do you know what happened to my brother yesterday? I saw it myself.] (171) We WALK in the forest. (172) Suddenly he STEP on a snake. (173) It BITE him in the leg. (174) he TAKE a stone and THROW at the snake. (175) It DIE. For the analysis of these prototypical PERFECTIVE contexts I consider it necessary to distinguish between contexts in isolated sentences, such as sentences 91, 92, 99, 100, and 101, and contexts which are part of a story, such as sentences 162, 165, 172, and 175. For the former, marking with bin constituted the normal case, whereas zero-marking or use of don was rare. The latter form was only used by one or two informants in each of these sentences, and the same goes for zero-marking. However, in sentence 100, 6 informants chose not to use any preverbal markers in their translations. Sentences 162, 165, 172, and 175, however, are part of a story, in which past time reference is already established by the context. In these contexts, most informants chose not to mark the verb overtly for tense or aspect, which corresponds to the Creole Prototype. We also find on average three informants preceding the verb with simple don, and in sentences 163 and 165 one informant using simple bin. The preferred uses of CPE preverbal marking in these 9 prototypical instances of the category PERFECTIVE are summarised in Table 8: Table 8. Prototypical uses of PERFECTIVE Sentence No.

CPE translations

162, 165, 172, 175

Ø / (bin) / (don)

91, 92, 99, 100 (verb 2), 101 (verb 2)

bin / (don) / (Ø)

184

Anne Schro¨der

As is evident from these results, CPE don is nearly absent from the contexts classified as prototypical PERFECTIVE, and I thus could draw a preliminary conclusion that don cannot be considered to be a prototypical perfective marker. However, all these contexts are in the past, which could mean that perfectivity is simply not marked in these contexts.26 Preverbal don is also absent in those contexts, which, according to Dahl, are prototypical examples of PAST occurrences (see section 3.3.2, especially Table 4). It therefore can also probably not be classified as a past marker. The data elicited with the TMA questionnaire therefore seem to suggest that don is an aspect marker indicating PERFECT, and not, as proposed in some previous publications (e.g. Mbassi-Manga 1973, Bellama et al. 1983, Ayafor 2000), a tense marker. However, those authors who refer to don as an ‘‘indicator of completed action’’ (e.g. Dwyer 1966, Schneider 1966), recent past (e.g. Todd 1969, 1991) or as completive/resultative (Fe´ral 1989, Schro¨der 2003a), are probably at least partially correct, as in general PERFECT is associated with four di¤erent, context-dependent meanings. These are: 1. Perfect of result; 2. Experiential perfect; 3. Perfect of persistent situation; and 4. Perfect of recent past (Dahl 1985: 132; Comrie 1976: 56¤.). According to Dahl, typical examples of the Perfect of result are sentences 54 and 69. Sentence 54 was an instance of preferred don use (see Table 7). Sentence 69 was not on the reduced version of the questionnaire which I used, but from my experience the use of don would be very likely in this context too. (69) [Q: Why is it so cold in the room? The window is open but the person who asks does not know. The person who opened the window answers:] I OPEN the window Sentence 42 is said to be a typical example of the Experiential perfect (Dahl 1985: 132), and this sentence was another instance of preferred don use (see Table 7). The Perfect of persistent situation could have been triggered by sentence 148 in the TMA questionnaire, but this sentence did not figure in the reduced version used for the present study (see note 7). (148) [Of a coughing child:) For how long has your son been coughing?] He COUGH for an hour

26. I am grateful to Ekkehard Wolf for pointing out this fact to me.

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

185

However, don use seems very unlikely here and di seems to be the more probable translation, especially because of the time adverbial provided in the original sentence. And finally, the Perfect of recent past can be elicited with sentence 133. (133) [The speaker has just seen the king arrive (no one had expected this event)] (Have you heard the news?) The king ARRIVE Unfortunately, this sentence did not figure on the reduced version of the TMA questionnaire used, but my experience suggests that most CPE speakers would translate this sentence using don. To sum up, CPE don seems to fulfil several functions.27 Similarly to what Youssef noted for Caribbean Creole English, the existence of overlapping categories can probably be assumed: ‘‘One marker can also fulfil more than one function e.g. completive [and] perfect for done, but one function is likely to dominate [. . .]’’ (Youssef 2003: 102). For CPE don, the dominant function seems to be PERFECT.

4. Conclusion If Tables 2–8 are compared to Table 1, one thing becomes clear: the previous descriptions of the tense and aspect system of CPE are quite close to the results elicited with the TMA questionnaire, especially with regard to go and bin.28 So, if the descriptions of tense and aspect in CPE are partly accurate and seem to work, why take the trouble to start a new study? I believe that concepts of time and thus of the tense and aspect systems of a language are culture specific and therefore should be described using language-independent methods. As demonstrated in the short summaries in section 2 above, in many of the previous descriptions of CPE, SE is taken as a point of reference. This is possibly justified for the teaching manuals (i.e. Dwyer 1966, Bellama et al. 1983, and Todd 1991) whose format and content is basically determined by pedagogical considerations and aimed at e.g. Peace Corps volunteers with a L1-English background. But I find it less appropriate in works which 27. These might, of course, in part be triggered o¤ by di¤erent aktionsarten of the verbs involved. For a discussion of the interplay between don and verb semantics, see also Schro¨der (2003a). 28. This may, of course, be the result of the circularity of the approach mentioned above, see note 8.

186

Anne Schro¨der

aim at a linguistic readership and where I would thus expect linguistic terminology and an approach which does justice to a system which – from a linguistic point of view – should be seen as synchronically separate of SE. All in all, many of the extant descriptions of tense and aspect in CPE described in section 2 resemble traditional descriptions of English grammar. The description of the English verb system has been modelled on Latin; hence the description of the English Present Perfect as a tense.29 Using a language-independent method of investigating tense and aspect in CPE can help to avoid what I have referred to as an ‘Anglicist view’ of CPE and also help to avoid repeating mistakes similar to those which have been made in the description of SE, e.g. the inaccurate labelling of don as a tense marker by Todd (1969, 1991), Mbassi-Manga (1973), Bellama et al. (1983), and Ayafor (2000, 2008). However, a caveat is necessary here: the TMA questionnaire is far from perfect. The most obvious criticism that can be put forward is that one cannot escape from the artificiality of the test situation, as noted already in 1970 by Greenbaum and Quirk (1970: 7). Or, as Croft (2003: 29) puts it: The process of eliciting grammatical information is not a natural language situation, and so the data provided do not always accurately represent actual language use. In particular, the native language consultant does not report actual usage, but instead an unsystematic perception of usage, colored by social attitudes toward the speech form and even toward the interrogator.

In additon, the influence of SE knowledge cannot be ruled out, and is even likely, as CPE is an English-based creole and many of the informants had an SE-medium education. This seemed particularly evident in the translations of sentences like 22, 23, 31 and 36 (sections 3.2.1.1 and 3.2.3.2). Therefore, the approach advocated here takes the analyses of CPE tense and aspect in previous publications into account; some of the authors discussed in section 2 above are native speakers of CPE, e.g. Ayafor and Mbassi-Manga, or can be considered to be near native speakers, e.g. Todd. Wherever the various descriptions of CPE and the results of the elicitation tests agree, a high degree of accuracy in the description can be assumed. 29. According to Bache (1994: 51), for instance, in many traditional grammars of English, the Present Perfect is regarded as a tense. He gives as examples Jespersen (1909–1949) and Kruisinga (1925: 30¤.).

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

187

On the basis of the investigations described in this chapter, the following observations concerning tense and aspect in CPE can therefore be made: – CPE exhibits an inventory of four preverbal markers of tense and aspect: these are go, bin, di and don/neba; – preverbal go and bin function as tense markers, indicating future and past time reference respectively; – preverbal di and don function as aspect markers; – di appears to be an imperfective marker, which includes the meanings of habituality and progressivity; – don seems to be a perfect marker, which has neba as its negated form, and also possibly has a secondary meaning, which could be perfective. These statements can be summarised as in Table 9: Table 9. Tense and aspect marking in CPE go

bin

di

don/neba

future

past

imperfective

perfect

Unfortunately, it is not within the scope of the present chapter to investigate the question of possible combinations of these four markers or the existence of rules of ordering similar to the ones suggested in the Creole Prototype (see Appendix, notes 4 and 13). These issues therefore will have to be dealt with in future analyses of the elicited TMA data, which should then also address the issue of circularity by searching for occurrences of the preverbal markers independently of the presupposed categories and possibly question Dahl’s category divisions and definitions.

Appendix Summary of the Creole Prototype as described by Bickerton (1975, 1980) and Givo`n (1982), taken from Schro¨der (2003a: 99): – The unmarked verb form carries its own specific meaning: past (or anterior) meaning for action verbs; present meaning for state verbs – All known Creole TAM systems exhibit the same three-member inventory of pre-verbal marking:

188

Anne Schro¨der

– – – –

anterior (past) marker imperfective (non-punctual, continuous, habitual, . . . ) marker mood (posterior, future, conditional, irrealis . . . ) marker The markers can only appear in the following order: (anterior) > (modal) > (imperfective) – Sentences already marked for tense – either by a temporal adverb or via the preceding context – do not necessarily contain grammatical tense markers – The reference point is not necessarily identical with the moment of speaking Table 10. Information on the participants

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Age

Education

anglophone/ francophone

Profession

L1

41–50 þ51 15–20 36–40 þ51 41–50 21–25 þ51 36–40 41–50 þ51 31–35 41–50 36–40 41–50

MA PhD still in school MA PhD PhD GSCE PhD MA Diploma college PhD PhD PhD BA PhD

anglophone anglophone anglophone anglophone anglophone anglophone anglophone anglophone francophone francophone anglophone anglophone francophone francophone francophone

teacher professor pupil teacher professor professor student lecturer engineer sergeant professor teacher professor teacher researcher

CPE CPE English Lamnso Ngemba Bakweri Esu Barossi Duala Bamvele Ga’akejom Nweh Ghomala Bamvele Ghomala

References Ayafor, Miriam. 2000. Kamtok: The ultimate unifying common national language for Cameroon. The Carrier Pidgin 28: 4–6. Ayafor, Miriam. 2008. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Morphology and syntax. In: Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.), Varieties of English, Volume 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 428–450. Bache, Carl. 1994. Verbal categories, form-meaning relationships and the English perfect. In: Bache, Carl, Hans Bosboll and Carl-Erik Lindberg (eds.), Tense, Aspect and Action: Empirical and Theoretical Contributions to Language Typology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 43–60.

Tense and aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English

189

Bache, Carl. 1995. The Study of Aspect, Tense and Action: Towards a Theory of the Semantics of Grammatical Categories. Frankfurt: Lang. Bellama, David, Solomon Nkwele and Joseph Yudom. 1983. An Introduction to Cameroonian Pidgin. Yaounde: Peace Corps Cameroon. Bickerton, Derek. 1975. Dynamics of a Creole System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bickerton, Derek. 1980. Creolization, linguistic universals, natural semantax and the brain. In: Day, Richard R. (ed.), Issues in English Creoles: Papers from the 1975 Hawaii Conference. Heidelberg: Julius Groos. 1–18. Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Croft, William. 2003. Typology and Universals. 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ¨ sten. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell. Dahl, O Dwyer, David. 1966. An Introduction to West African Pidgin English. Michigan State University: African Studies Center. Fe´ral, Carole de. 1989. Pidgin-English du Cameroun: Description Linguistique et Sociolinguistique. Paris: Peeters/Selaf. Gilman, Charles. 1972. The Comparative Structure in French, English, and Cameroonian Pidgin English: An Exercise in Linguistic Comparison. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Northwestern University, Illinois. University microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Givo`n, Talmy. 1982. Tense, aspect, modality: The Creole Prototype and beyond. In: Hopper, Paul (ed.), Between Semantics and Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 115–164. Greenbaum, Sidney and Randolph Quirk. 1970. Elicitation Experiments in English: Linguistic Studies in Use and Attitude. London: Longman. Hackert, Stephanie. 2004. Urban Bahamian Creole: System and Variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1949. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles I-VII. London: Munksgaard. Kruisinga, E. 1925. A Handbook of Present-day English. Part II: English Accidence and Syntax. Utrecht: Kemink en Zoon. Lefebvre, Claire. 1996. The tense, mood, and aspect system of Haitian Creole and the problem of transmission of grammar in creole genesis. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 11(2): 231–311. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon: A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Schneider, Gilbert. 1966. West African Pidgin English: A Descriptive Linguistic Analysis with Texts and Glossary from the Cameroon Area. Athens: Ohio. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003a. Aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English. In: Lucko, Peter, Lother Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English. Frankfurt: Lang. 83–100.

190

Anne Schro¨der

Schro¨der, Anne. 2003b. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English. An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Narr. Sidnell, Jack. 2002. Habitual and imperfective in Guyanese Creole. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 17(2): 151–190. Singler, John Victor (ed.). 1990. Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect Systems. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Todd, Loreto. 1969. Pidgin English of West Cameroon. Belfast: Queen’s University. Todd, Loreto. 1971. Review of West African Pidgin English. A Descriptive Linguistic Analysis with Texts and Glossary from the Cameroun Area by Gilbert Schneider. Lingua 28: 185–197. Todd, Loreto. 1991. Talk Pidgin. A Structured Course in West African Pidgin English. Leeds: Tortoise Books. Winford, Donald. 1993. Predication in Caribbean English Creoles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Winford, Donald. 1996a. Common ground and creole TMA. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 11(1): 71–84. Winford, Donald. 1996b. Creole typology and relationships. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 11(2): 313–328. Winford, Donald. 2000. Tense and aspect in Sranan and the Creole Prototype. In: McWhorter, John (ed.), Language Change and Language Contact in Pidgins and Creoles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 383–442. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Youssef, Valerie. 1995. Tense-aspect in Tobagonian English: A dynamic transitional system. English World-Wide 16(2): 195–213. Youssef, Valerie. 2003. How perfect is perfective marking? An analysis of terminological problems in the description of some tense-aspect categories in creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 18(1): 81–106.

Chapter 9 Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English: Formal and functional perspectives Bonaventure M. Sala 1. Introduction A Pidgin is an idiom born in a multilingual and multi-ethnic community as a contact language, and serving the double function of lingua franca among its speakers and of bridge between the indigenes and the master. This is one of the varying definitions one will find in textbooks on Pidgin. In this vein, Pidgins have often developed in colonial settings, where contact between the slave and the master or between the European trader and indigenes has occurred. Because of their humble origins, Pidgins use foreign and local vocabulary, and the grammar of the community in which they are born. Hence, Pidgins are born in the grammar of their habitats and then gradually sprinkle themselves with vocabulary items from a variety of sources, mainly from their status languages. Thus, the importance of vocabulary to a Pidgin makes the study of a lexical process underlying its lexicon a worthy e¤ort. This illustrative chapter studies reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE), which appears to be one of the most important internal productive resources the idiom has to expand or elaborate its vocabulary, aside from compounding. The chapter attempts to answer the following questions: What are the formal properties of reduplication in CPE? What syntactic and semantic functions does reduplication play in CPE? What tonal modifications come as a result of the reduplication transformation? Data are collected from some written documents on CPE, including the translated New Testament, Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul (2000, henceforth GNFOP) and Pidgin English Prayer Book (Awah 1981), two religious documents that are widely used in Cameroon, and two existing dictionaries and wordlists on CPE, namely, Schneider (1960) and Ngome (1984). Some of the data, though, is from general participant-observation with the use of speaker competence.

192

Bonaventure M. Sala

2. Origins, forms and functions of reduplication Reduplication is a process whereby words or parts of words are repeated to form new words with a di¤erent, but connected, predictable meaning. Rubino (2005: 11) defines it as ‘‘the systematic repetition of phonological material within a word for semantic or grammatical purposes’’. It is to be distinguished from other repetitions of words not ascribable to the domain of lexicology. One of these is syntactic repetitions called iterations, often meant for emphasis. There has been some controversy with the use of the word ‘reduplication’ in the literature. Moravcsik (1978: 300), for example, considers the term ‘reduplication’ as infelicitous. She recommends the use of ‘repetitive construction’ or ‘iteration’ to describe the phenomenon. Holm (1988: 88) distinguishes between repetition and reduplication. One condition that has been set for reduplication is that it must result in a new word, with a slightly di¤erent meaning from the original word but still connected to it. This presupposes that an old word must exist for there to be reduplication. Huber (1999: 244), however, makes mention of reduplicated words in Ghanaian Pidgin English (GPE) that do not necessarily stem from existing words in the language. He links this class of reduplications to Krio loanwords that have maintained their original tone patterns. Reduplication is therefore not always the result of a productive process in a language. It is important in a paper of this nature to find out how the structure under consideration comes to being, as genetic issues have occupied a central place in research in Pidgins and Creoles (P/Cs). Where Pidgins have existed, its speakers have often had just minimum exposure to the lexifier language. As P/Cs are contact languages, known to fuse the features of both substrate and superstrate languages, the question is often: where does the Pidgin or Creole acquire its dynamism? Is it from the substratum or from the lexifier language? In the contact situation, the grammar of the substratum is often used and the vocabulary comes mainly from the lexifier language. The temptation is often to ask where Creoles, which are said to derive genetically from Pidgins, take this feature – reduplication. Bakker and Parkvall (2005: 516) wonder: ‘‘if reduplication is alien to most Pidgins, why is it so common in their presumed o¤-springs, the Creole languages?’’ If Pidgins do not have reduplication and Creoles have it, reduplication may be a feature of established languages. Bakker and Parkvall (2005) conclude that there is no relationship between the frequency of reduplication forms in a substrate language and its Creole language. Lefebvre

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

193

(2004: 8) contends that there is no specific process for the formation of P/Cs, since these processes are also observed in normal language formation. This means that creating a separate theory for P/Cs is redundant. Reduplication is, however, very common in African languages, as expressed in Mutaka (1994), and in some non-African languages, hence arguably lending some credibility to substratum influence. There is also little consensus as to whether reduplication is typical of Pidgins or of their advanced stages referred to as Creoles. The one school has linked it to developing languages like jargons, Pidgins and baby-talk phenomena, showing it as an important morphological process in the unstable stages of language development, and arguing therefore that it is part of the general strategy in human language used to expand vocabulary where there is not enough variety. Leroy and Morgenstern (2005: 475f ) a‰rm that in child language development, ‘‘babbling becomes reduplicant’’ mainly due to physiological and mechanical constraints. Bickerton (1984) concludes that reduplication is a bio-programme feature as most first language acquisition patterns in children carry it.1 Seen from this perspective, reduplication becomes a common strategy used to expand degenerate lexical items in developing, unstable languages. The other school holds that reduplication is more common with Creoles than with Pidgins. Bakker and Parkvall (2005: 514¤ ) contend that ‘‘with few exceptions, we can state that reduplication does not exist in Pidgins, despite many authors not only claiming the opposite, but in fact even mentioning reduplication as typical of pidginisation . . . reduplication is rare in pidgins and almost universal in creoles’’. Proponents of this school make a distinction between reduplication that occurs in native languages and non-native languages. Pidgins are generally said to be non-native languages and Creoles, native languages. The fact of being more common with Creoles than with Pidgins is proof that reduplication is a process used in later, stable stages of language development. With these two schools, the moot question in current research is therefore whether reduplication is typically ascribable to P/Cs. A weak version can hold that it belongs to both P/Cs, the latter using it more because of the pressure to expand pre-

1. Baby-talk phenomena in Cameroon is noticed with such expressions as papa (father), mama (mother), tata (aunt, senior adult female), tonton (uncle), pipi (urine) and pupu (excreta), often used by children in early stages of language acquisition.

194

Bonaventure M. Sala

viously limited vocabulary. It is foreseeable for stable languages to have creative, productive processes than unstable languages like jargons and Pidgins because it takes time for a tacit convention to be put in place in a speech community. Formal patterns in reduplication are di¤erentiated by the quality and quantity of words involved in reduplication and the number of times reduplication occurs for particular words, which varies from the one Pidgin to the other. Nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs are common word classes involved in reduplication. The reduplication of function words is a rare occurrence. In what concerns quantity, reduplicated forms are not patterned in the same manner in all P/Cs. Partial and complete reduplications ar two broad patterns often cited. Partial reduplications double only a syllable of a word and complete reduplications double the entire word. Partial reduplication is said to develop from complete reduplication and is consequently attested in older Creoles and advanced stages of language development. Since it is noticed with older Creoles and established languages, it could be the function of time and the result of language evolution, which often tends to reduce redundancies. Examples of partial reduplication in CPE include the word awawa ‘‘waves’’ (GNFOP, p.15) and afofo ‘‘a kind of locally brewed spirit’’, whose base forms are not free morphemes in the language. Huber (1999: 240f ) reports, for GPE, another kind of partial reduplication involving compounds, where only the first noun in the compound is reduplicated as in village-village pikin (village children). He goes ahead to show that ‘‘there is no theoretical limit to the number of times a certain word may be repeated in reduplication’’. Hence, light-light-lightlight-light-light could mean ‘‘several street lights’’ (see also Huber 2003 on verbal reduplication). Reduplication in P/Cs takes several semantic patterns, though all reported patterns have not been found in any single Pidgin or Creole. For example, Tok Pisin uses reduplication only to mark plurality (Mehrotra 1997: 47), a pattern described as rare in other P/Cs. Derivational reduplication, used for changing word class (as seen in a reduplicated verb resulting in a noun or adjective), is common with Atlantic Creoles (Bakker and Parkvall 2005). Other common semantic patterns often cited include intensive/argumentative (to V a lot), aspectual meaning (to V habitually, repeatedly or continuously), spatial distributive (to V here and there). Adjectives are reduplicated for the purpose of intensification (very Adj). Numerals are reduplicated to translate ‘two each, two by two, both of them’. Interrogative pronouns could be reduplicated to create indefinite

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

195

pronouns meaning (any X). Atlantic French Creoles have less reduplication than English-based Creoles. Word classes that are candidates for reduplication include verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and numerals but rarely question words and other functional categories (Hurch 2005). Studies on reduplication in P/Cs, especially in Atlantic P/Cs, have concluded that reduplication is essentially an iconic lexical process, whose grammatical function is to mark number and aspect. Given that formal and semantic patterns are generalised in all P/Cs, which patterns are therefore attested in CPE? Which patterns are shared with other P/Cs and which ones are ascribable only to CPE? Bakker and Parkvall (2005) suggest that most researchers in reduplication do not assess the tonal transformations that accompany reduplication in P/Cs. However, Gooden (2003: 93) shows with data from Jamaican Creole that reduplicated morphemes that express di¤erent semantic ideas are governed by prosodic constraints specific to them. How does reduplication a¤ect the original tone pattern of the word in CPE? This chapter proposes answers to these questions. 3. Reduplication of the noun in CPE 3.1. Inherent reduplication Lexicalised reduplication is the first phenomenon to notice when nouns are reduplicated in CPE. Here, the reduplicated word, taken singly, does not exist in CPE. Words that fall into this category are inherently reduplicated forms. Consider the following examples: (1) bia`-bia´ (n) bo`lo`-bo´lo´ (n) chu`ku`-chu´ku´ (n) da`wa`-da´wa´ (n) gwa`-gwa´ (n) ju`ju´ (n) ka`ta`-ka´ta´ (adj, n) Ko`o-ko´o (n) ko`ro`-ko´ro´ (n) nja`ma`-nja´ma´ (n) pa`la`-pa´la´ (n) po`to`-po´to´ (n) wu`ru`-wu´ru´ (n)

hair balloon thorns (adj. as in ‘chu`ku`-chu´ku´ beef ’ – porcupine) kind of condiment duck masquarader, masquarade dancer rough, rascally, whelp cocoyam body rashes huckleberry wrestling mud tricks, cunning

196

Bonaventure M. Sala

The cases in (1) show reduplicated forms whose single forms have no meaning in CPE. For example, ‘da`wa`’, ‘nja`ma`’, ‘chu`ku`’, and ‘po`to`’ mean nothing in CPE, and are therefore bound morphemes. This category of reduplicated forms manifests an observable tone pattern. In the case of the reduplication of one-syllable words, the form is [low-high] as seen in bia`-bia´. With two-syllable words, the pattern is [low low-high high], as seen in ko`ro`-ko´ro´. Since these words are inherently reduplicated given that they are made up of bound morphemes, they play no other syntactic function apart from naming what they refer to. This means that they are not created through a productive process and are not iconic in nature. However, it is perceivable that ko`o-ko´o may have been clipped from the English ‘cocoyam’. It is also important to note that the word mu´mu´ (dumb, deaf ) (GNFOP, p. 18) is inherently reduplicated but has a [high-high] tone pattern. Recently introduced inherently reduplicated nouns do not carry the [low-high] tone pattern. This is the case of zua`-zua` (smuggled fuel from Nigeria, also known as fu`nge`) which entered CPE in the early 1990s. One would think that the word comes from Nigerian Pidgin English, but curiously, Babawilly’s (2001) dictionary, which purports to be based on Lagos Pidgin English, does not carry it. Other inherently reduplicated items with varying tone patterns include ka`le´-ka`le´ (a police raid and general arrests in a neighbourhood), kwa´ra´-kwa`ra` (a straw mat or matted room-divider) with exceptionally a [high high-low low] tone pattern. Some onomatopoeic reduplicated forms such as kwa´-kwa´ (word that accompanies or replaces a knock at the door), tu`m-tu`m (motorcycle) and kiki (chicken) are also inherently reduplicated but do not have corresponding free base forms. They carry tone patterns di¤erent from the ones postulated in (1) above. Though we consider nouns in this section, inherent reduplication is also attested in other word classes as seen in wo`-wo´ (adj: ugly), nke`ne`-nke´ne´ (adj: slippery), chu`ku`-chu´ku´ (adj: thorny), and ba`-ba´ (v: to carry someone, especially a child, on the back). 3.2. Reduplication for plurality Reduplicating the noun could also indicate plurality or show a certain quantity of the noun as in (2a) and (2b) below. Kind-kind in (2a) and hafhaf in (2b) show varieties and quantities of clothes and food respectively.

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

197

(2a) E bu kind-kind clus dem.2 He buy kind kind cloth PL ‘‘He bought several/many kinds of clothes.’’ (2b)

De lanboi dem pik de haf-haf chop we e bin remain The disciple PL pick the half half food that SM ASP remain ‘‘The disciples gathered the pieces of food that were left.’’ (GNFOP, p. 31)

This function is widely acclaimed in Schneider (1960). It is often quoted in the literature to refer to the iconic nature of reduplication in P/Cs. In GPE, as quoted above, there exists no limit to the number of times a word may be repeated (Huber 1999: 240) or as Gooden (2003: 94) says, ‘‘there are no rules’’. It should be noted that this function is phasing out in current CPE usage (see Sala and Ngefac 2006). For example, ‘‘Dis boy get njumba-njumba plenty’’ (Schneider 1960: 199) will be rendered today as ‘‘Dis boy get plenty njumba (dem)’’. This is grammaticalisation, which vitiates the iconicity of reduplication in CPE. Dressler et al. (2005: 469) state that ‘‘iconic reduplication [in child language] prevails before language specific system adequacy of grammar can curb it’’. This implies that the loss of iconicity may also be indicative of an advanced stage of development in P/Cs.

2. The issue of a spelling convention for CPE is an intricate one, as it is in other Pidgins around the world. This is underscored in Ayafor (1996), Schro¨der (2003), Sala (2009) and Mu¨hleisen and Anchimbe (this volume). The dilemma has been choosing between a phonetic writing system and an English-based one. The problem with fixing a writing system in CPE is due to the variegated sources of its vocabulary (viz. English, French, and African languages), variation noted with individual words and also the changing nature of the vocabulary (see Sala and Ngefac 2006). For example, Schneider (1960) gives the following as variants for the word ‘hospital’: watapita, wasafita, hosfita, hospitu, waspita. Amongst these, hospitu and hospita seem to be in common use today. However, for this paper, we use the English derived system for words of English origin that have maintained their pronunciation, at least as in Cameroon English. We use a phonetic system for words from African languages, local coinages and other distorted English words. Data from GNFOP and existing dictionaries and wordlists are left as they appear in the original documents. The debate about a writing system for CPE is a serious one and I have handled it in another paper (see Sala 2009). It is, however, revisited in this volume by Mu¨hleisen and Anchimbe in their study of Bible translation in CPE.

198

Bonaventure M. Sala

3.3. Reduplication for restriction The reduplication of nouns is also used to bring out some idea of restriction. By restriction here is meant a situation where one has ‘only’ a kind of thing, with no variety. The noun could be in the plural but it lacks variety. (3a) E di soso born na boy-boy. She ASP continuously give birth it is boy boy ‘‘She keeps on giving birth only to boys.’’ (3b)

Na wuna wuna deh? It is you you be ‘‘Are you the only ones present?’’ ‘‘Are you left to yourselves?’’

(3c) Na we-we it is us us ‘‘Let’s wait and see.’’ ‘‘It is only us’’ (3d)

We di chop na fufu-fufu. We ASP eat it is fufu fufu ‘‘It is only fufu that we are eating.’’

(3e) House na shit-shit. House it is excrement excrement ‘‘Excrement is found everywhere in the house.’’ ‘‘Only excrement can be found in the house.’’ What the speaker in example (3a) means is that ‘she’ has given birth to boys only. (3b) means that there is none else but you. (3c) means that there is no one else but us, so we cannot deceive one another. (3d) shows that we lack variety of foods and eat nothing else but fufu. (3e) shows that there is nothing else in the house apart from excrement. The recurrent word in the analyses of (3) is ‘only’, which is the English word that marks limitation. It means ‘‘only X and nothing else’’. For instance, if I wanted to ask whether my friend would drink only soup, I would say: ‘‘You go drink na soup-soup?’’ It is also necessary to note that this use is only attested in the objective context. This is why the particle na (it is) must precede such usage in subject position as seen in (3b) and (3c). Besides, even in objective position, we also notice the presence of na before the reduplicated structure as in (3d) and (3e). If na in CPE is a focus particle, we can conclude that ‘‘na X-X’’ means ‘‘it is only X’’ in English. Alternatively, ‘only’ could be

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

199

expressed in CPE by the adverb daso placed in front of the noun. Hence, (3a) and (3b) could also be written as (4a) and (4b): (4a) E di soso born na daso boy. He ASP continuously give birth it is only boy ‘‘He keeps on giving birth only to boys.’’ (4b)

Na daso wuna (wuna) deh? It is only you be ‘‘Are you the only ones present?’’

As far as we know, the reduplication of nouns for the semantic function of restriction has not yet been exceedingly reported in other varieties of P/Cs. Gooden’s (2003) study focuses on other semantic functions but not restriction, while Huber (2003) is on verbal reduplication. Verbs could serve the function of attenuation as in the Mauritius French Creole marmarse (to go for a stroll), derived from marse (walk) (Bakker and Parkvall 2005: 512). The semantic pattern of restriction suggests that reduplication could also be used to designate less of something, inversely to the iconic properties of the phenomenon seen above. 3.4. Reduplication for one-to-one mapping Another use of reduplication in CPE is to show what I refer to here as a one-to-one mapping.3 One-to-one mapping is a situation where individual items in a group of things or persons are correlated to some other thing to express the meaning of ‘‘X each’’ or ‘‘X by X’’ or ‘‘X after the other’’, where X is a number. This entails that it is common with numerals in CPE. Consider (5c) below, which is an answer to (5b): (5a) Pear na fifty. pear it is fifty ‘‘The pear costs fifty francs.’’ (5b)

Pear na how much-how much? Pear it is how much how much’’ ‘‘Each pear costs how much?’’ ‘‘How much is each pear?’’

3. The use of the term ‘‘one-to-one mapping’’ here is due to the fact that this particular function has not been christened in the literature. For example, Bakker and Parkvall (2005: 512) refer to the reduplication of numerals as ‘‘distributive’’ which conflicts with their use of the word ‘‘distributive’’ to describe other functions of nouns and verbs.

200

Bonaventure M. Sala

(5c) Pear na fifty-fifty. pear it is fifty fifty ‘‘Each pear costs fifty francs.’’ In example (5) reduplication is used to consider things that form a group separately or individually. The pears seller could have a basketful of them, but each costs fifty francs. Consider (6) for another dimension of the phenomenon: (6) Wuna enter one one. You (PL) come in one one ‘‘Come in one after the other.’’ Example (6) means that from the group, people have to come in individually. Just like the pears costing fifty francs each, we find many people outside and the one going in after the other. (7) below explores the issue even further: (7a) E bin take ten-ten thousand for we. He PST take ten ten thousand from us ‘‘He took ten thousands from each of us.’’ (7b)

E bin take ten thousand for we. He PST take ten thousand from us ‘‘He took ten thousand from us.’’

(7c)

*E bin take ten-ten thousand for me. ‘‘*He took ten thousands from me each.’’

Example (7a) describes a situation in which people are in a group and ten thousand francs was taken from each of them. This is buttressed by (7b) where ten thousand was taken from the whole group and not from each of its members. (7c) is ungrammatical because the meaning, ‘each’, cannot go with a singular noun. The repetitive aspect can be mixed with this one as seen in (8): (8a) E don take-take ten-ten thousand for we. He ASP take take ten ten thousand from us ‘‘He has repeatedly taken ten thousand notes from each of us.’’ (8b)

E don take-take clean-clean ten-ten thousand-dem for we. He ASP take take clean clean ten ten thousand PL from us ‘‘He has repeatedly taken very clean ten thousand notes from each of us.’’

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

201

In (8a), ten thousand notes were taken from each individual of the group many times. In (8b), the ten thousand notes taken many times from each member of the group were very clean. The recurrent thing in the phenomenon shown in (5), (6) and (7) is a one-to-one mapping. It is a kind of distributive relationship because we see a single price or amount going for each member in the group. There is therefore some overlap between one-to-one mapping and distribution.

4. The reduplication of adjectives Apart from the inherent reduplication seen with some nouns above, other reduplication transformations in CPE are formed from the doubling of words that exist in the language. They are formed from free morphemes and, thanks to the derivation, perform other syntactic and semantic functions. Reduplication in CPE could play an intensificative role when formed from adjectives and adverbs. This role is comparable to that played by the English ‘‘very’’ and ‘‘extremely’’. Consider the examples in (9) below: (9) Free morpheme

Reduplicated derivative

big (big) wa`ta´ (water)

some big-big hole (a very big hole) wa`ta´-wa`ta´ soup (very watery soup)

fain (beautiful) long (long) sharp (sharp) dear (expensive) cheap (cheap) trong (strong)

some fain-fain woman (a very beautiful woman) some long-long rope (a very long rope) sharp-sharp morning (very early in the morning) dear-dear shoes (very expensive shoes) cheap-cheap cargo (very cheap goods) trong-trong (very strong) (GNFOP, p. 114) trongtrong foot (very tough leg) hai-hai (very high) (GNFOP, p.115) hai-hai hill (very high hill) kul-kul (lek dov) – very calm (innocent as doves) (GNFOP, p. 19)

hai (high, up) kul (cold) plenti (many, much) fest (first)

plenti-plenti (very many) (GNFOP, p. 276) plenti-plenti moni (a lot of money) profet dem for fest-fest time (early prophets) (GNFOP, p. 77)

202

Bonaventure M. Sala

(9) is a purely iconic phenomenon where repetition means intensification. It is observed that the tone pattern of the root adjective does not change after reduplication. We can conclude that, when used for intensification, the original tone of the adjective is maintained. Hence, from wa`ta´, we have wa`ta´-wa`ta´, and from big we have big-big. CPE adjectives are not reduplicated for attenuation.

5. The reduplication of adverbs In (10) below, adverbs and adverbials are also reduplicated for intensificative purposes. (10) Free morpheme trong (strongly) so´frı` (slowly) na´yo` (gently) plenti (much) now (now) smol (small) fri (free)

Reduplicated derivative for hala trong-trong (to cry out very loudly) for wa´ka` so´frı`-so´frı` (to walk very slowly) for go na´yo`-na´yo` (to go very gently) thank you plenti-plenti (thank you very much) A di go now-now (I am going right away/with immediate e¤ect/presently.) smol-smol – very slowly (GNFOP, p. 275) fri-fri – very freely (GNFOP, p. 279)

As with adjectives above, the tone pattern on reduplicated adverbs in (10) does not change. Reduplication for intensification in CPE is achieved by repeating the particular adjectival or adverbial modifier. In this adverbial function, the reduplicated form comes after the verb to which it is attached. This makes it di¤erent from the adjectival function in which the reduplicated form comes before the noun. CPE adverbs are not reduplicated for attenuation.

6. Reduplication of verbs As reported in other P/Cs, the reduplication of verbs in CPE equally serves aspectual purposes, mainly the iterative or repetitive and the distributive aspects.

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

203

6.1. Iterative aspect One typical function of reduplication of the verb in CPE is the iterative or repetitive aspect. It is iterative because the action takes place several times over a period of time. Consider the sentences in (11): (11a) E di waka-waka. He ASP walk walk ‘‘He is roaming about.’’ (11b)

E don broke broke. It ASP break break ‘‘It has shattered.’’

(11c) De rope don cut-cut. The rope ASP cut cut ‘‘The rope has (been) cut into pieces.’’ (11d)

E don tear-tear ma clothes. He ASP tear tear my clothes ‘‘He has torn my clothes into many pieces.’’

(11e) Fo daa tam, dem teik ston dem fo shut-shut yi wit-am. At that time they take stone PL to shoot shoot him with it ‘‘At that time, they picked up stones to shoot him.’’ (GNFOP, p. 193) (11f )

Dem bin di jam-jam yi for toch yi. (GNFOP, p. 70) They Asp push push him to touch him ‘‘They were pressing hard on him in order to touch him.’’

In (11a), we see a single person going to many places aimlessly. In (11b), we see a single item breaking up many times, that is, into pieces. These are the meanings of ‘roaming’ and ‘shattered’, respectively. In (11c), we see a rope cut many times or in many places and therefore into many pieces. In (11e) stones are shot at him many times and in (11f ) the act of pushing is repeated. The recurrent thing in (11) is that a single entity performs an action or reaches another state with multiple results. This could be referred to as the repetitive aspect. This aspect is represented in English by di¤erent lexical items, but in CPE, it is realised through reduplication. Consider the table below: As Table 1 illustrates, the derivation of the repetitive aspect in BrE is lexicalised by way of the use of a separate word. The same process in

204

Bonaventure M. Sala

Table 1. The derivation of the repetitive or iterative aspect in BrE and in CPE BrE

CPE

Verb

Repetitive aspect

Verb

Repetitive aspect

walk

roam

wa´ka`

wa`ka`-wa´ka´

break

shatter

broke

broke-broke

cut

cut into pieces

cut

cut-cut

tear

tear all over

tear

tear-tear

hang

spread

hang

hang-hang

wash

do laundry

wash

wash-wash

shake

tremble

shake

shake-shake

complain

nag

ha`la´

ha`la`-ha´la´

to be angry

bear a grudge

vex

vex-vex

bend/curb

to be crooked

bend

bend-bend

fear

to be a coward

fear

fear-fear

to be happy

to be excited

glad

glad-glad

CPE is realised through the productive reduplication rule. Hence, to show that an action took place many times, CPE simply repeats the verb describing that action. Here again, quantity or plurality of action is shown through repetition. Some issues arise from (11e). Many people picked up stones, though it is not clear whether each person picked up several stones. If each person picked up a single stone, then each person would shoot once. Shooting once cannot be repetition. The meaning of shut-shut (shoot several times) therefore comes from several shots, though each person in the group shoots only once. There is some verb/instrument concord operating here. Consider (11g-j) below for a further examination of the issue: (11g)

E teik stun fo shut yi wit-am. ‘‘He picked up a stone to shoot him.’’

(11h) E teik stun dem fo shut-shut yi wit-am. ‘‘He picked up stones to shoot him. (11i)

Dem teik stun dem fo shut-shut yi wit-am. They picked up stones to shoot him.

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

(11j)

205

Dem teik-teik stun dem fo shut-shut yi wit-am. They picked up stones to shoot him.

In (11g), a single person picks up a stone to shoot ‘‘him’’. Where there is only one stone, shooting can only be once. In (11h), a single person picks up more than one stone to shoot him. This is iterative as action is repeated by the same person. In (11i), several people pick up one stone each to shoot him. This is mid-way between iterative and distributive because the person is shot repeatedly but by several people, each one shooting once. In (11j), many people pick up stones several times to shoot him. This is a mixture of repetitive and distributive. Many people pick up stones many times and shoot him many times. (11g–j) shows that shut-shut can only go with a plural instrument. 6.2. The distributive aspect As already seen in (11), closely related to the repetitive aspect is the distributive aspect, which has been widely reported in P/Cs. Consider (12) below: (12) E don wash-wash yi clus dem hang-hang-am for rope. He ASP wash wash his clothes PL hang hang them on rope ‘‘He has washed his clothes and spread them on the rope.’’ The repetitive aspect as seen in (11a)–(11c) describes a situation in which an action is performed repeatedly on the same entity. Example (12) shows that the agent performs a single kind of action several times but on di¤erent su¤erers or on the same su¤erer, ‘‘here and there’’. Hence, for the distributive aspect to be used, the su¤erer needs somewhat to be in the plural. In (12), there is first of all washing, followed by hanging. Reduplication here shows that the actor did not wash and hang a single dress, but rather did so to many dresses. Occasionally, the distributive aspect may be eclipsed in the repetitive aspect, especially when ‘distribution’ has been going on repeatedly or when action is performed ‘‘here and there’’ on the same su¤erer. Consider (13) below: (13a) E don over wash-wash dis clus dem hang-hang-am for here. He ASP too much wash wash these clothes PL hang hang them here ‘‘He has washed and spread these clothes here too many times.’’

206 (13b)

Bonaventure M. Sala

E don over hang-hang dis clus for here. He ASP too much hang hang this cloth here ‘‘He has hung this dress here many times.’’

(13a) is a mixture of both aspects, i.e., it portrays the same action done repeatedly on several su¤erers. (13b) is repetitive showing that hanging has taken place over and over on the same place for the same entity. It can therefore be concluded that the aspectual quality marked by reduplication in CPE is that of repetition and distribution. There is some confluence between both aspects. Something can break up into several pieces just as several things can break up into several pieces. Consider (14) below: (14a) Dis pikin-dem di cry-cry. This child pl ASP cry cry ‘‘These children are crying.’’ (distributive) (14b)

Dis pikin di over cry-cry. This child ASP too much cry cry ‘‘This child cries too much all the time.’’ (habitual/repetitive)

(14c) Pikin-dem di soso cry-cry. Child PL ASP too much cry cry ‘‘Children are crying repeatedly.’’ (distributive/repetitive) Example (14) deals with the subject of an intransitive verb. (14a) refers to a set of children who keep on crying. This is repetitive in nature but at the same time also distributive. (14b) refers to a child who is in the habit of crying. This is repetitive because it has to do with a single person. (14c) refers to children crying, each one taking part in the action, which could be spread in many places. You could have one here and the other there or all in the same place. This is the distributive aspect. It could also be repetitive if the crying goes on and on as seen in the use of ‘soso’. There is therefore some overlap between the repetitive and distributive aspects, as repetition is inherent in distribution whenever it involves plural nouns.

7. Derivative reduplication Some cases of derivative reduplication can be found in CPE. In our investigation, we found the following three cases in Ngome (1984):

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

(15) Single word a) sa`wa` (adj) b) tay (v) c) pı´sı´s (n) d) ntu`mbu´ (n)

207

Reduplicated form sour sa`wa`-sa´wa´ a kind of sour tasting fruit to tie ta`y-ta´y rope bridge rag pı´sı´s-pı´sı´s tape worm maggot ntu`mbu´-ntu`mbu´ casting of lots, any arbitrary way of making a selection

In (15a), a noun is derived from an adjective through the process of reduplication. In (15b), a noun is derived from a verb. The examples in (15c–d) provide cases where the reduplicated form is not iconically connected to the base form. There is no semantic association between a rag and a tape worm (15c), or between the process of casting lots and a maggot (15d). We therefore suppose that reduplication has derived a completely di¤erent noun from the existing noun. This, however, does not stop the words from existing iconically in other contexts. For example, pisis-pisis could mean ‘‘many pieces’’ (GNFOP p. 277). We can also have ntu`mbu´-ntu`mbu´ used in the restrictive sense of ‘‘only maggots’’. Where the reduplicated form has two meanings, only context specifies the particular meaning in a conversation.

8. Reduplication and tone It is necessary to reconsider the tonal modifications involved in reduplication in CPE. Urbanczyk (2005: 211) states that ‘‘the enhancement of contrasts has been related to the functional goal of maximising the distinctiveness of segments’’. We have seen in the above uses that after a reduplication transformation, the tone could change or remain the same. It is therefore important to note when change occurs because it is part of the CPE speaker’s competence. We have concluded from (1) that forms that are inherently reduplicated generally observe a [low-high] or [low lowhigh high] tone pattern as seen in bı`a-bı´a (hair) and ko`ro`-ko´ro´ (body rashes). This very pattern has also been seen for verbs when reduplication shows the iterative and the distributive aspects, for instance, for wa`ka`wa´ka´ (11a) and for cu`t-cu´t (11c). The tone is invariably [low-high] or [low low-high high], irrespective of the original tone on the root word.

208

Bonaventure M. Sala

However, when reduplication is used for intensification as in (9) and (10), to show limitation of people or things as in (3), and for one-to-one mapping as in (5) and (6), no tonal variation is noticed. The tone remains the same for both morphemes as it was in the original word or root word. It could be [low low-high high] or [high low-high low], etc. The following questions are important here: Why do tones change in reduplication only to the [low-high] pattern? Is there an e¤aced reduplicated tone somewhere that leads to this pattern, which could be termed the reduplicated tone? Is it a natural tonal pattern in CPE? In the meantime, one could suggest that CPE lexicology makes a distinction between primary parts of speech like nouns and verbs and secondary parts of speech like adjectives and adverbs – a distinction often noticed with established languages. In Sala’s (2010) study of tone patterns in CPE compounds, the conclusion is that the pattern [low-high] is used in compound words to mark the category ‘abstract noun derived from a concrete noun’. The [low-high] tone pattern therefore constitutes the music of CPE. The distributive nature of the reduplicated tone patterning can be sized from (16) below: (16a) E don wear some dear-dear clus (intensificative) She ASP wear a expensive expensive dress ‘‘She has worn a very expensive dress.’’ (16b)

For de`ar-de´ar clus-dem (distributive) To expensive expensive dresses PL ‘‘to sell dresses expensively.’’

(16c) E di over de`ar-de´ar clus-dem. He ASP too much (make) expensive expensive clothes PL ‘‘He sells clothes very expensively.’’ Example (16a) means that the dress is very expensive. (16c) means that the person has many dresses for sale with each one sold expensively. It is possible to postulate that the absence of the [low-high] reduplicated tone phenomenon with adjectives and adverbs plays a distinctive role, that of distinguishing adjectives from verbs. This is so because the transformation from adjective to verb in CPE is done through conversion, with no visible syllabic change. Consider the examples (17) and (18) below: (17a) Some trong-trong wind di blow A strong strong wind ASP blow ‘‘A very strong wind is blowing.’’

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

(17b)

209

Dis girl just tro`ng-tro´ng some way. This girl just strong strong some how ‘‘This girl is too muscular.’’

Other contrasts noticed with CPE reduplication include the following: (18a) chop (n, v)

food, to eat

chop-chop (n) food every where ` ´ chop-chop (n, v) glutton, eat repeatedly Cho´p-Cho´p personal name of a popular comedian in Cameroon (18b)

lai (n, v) lie, to lie lai-lai (n) lies all over la`i-la´i (n, adj) falsehood, fake, many lies (la`i-la´i pipul ‘‘hypocritical people’’ (GNFOP, p. 49)) la´i-la´i interjection (as in the colloquial la´i-la´i to la´i-la´i ‘‘God forbid’’, ‘‘This cannot work’’)

These examples show that a reduplicated form in CPE could possibly take three forms distinguished by tone contrasts. 9. Reduplication and the status of CPE So far, a consensual definition of Creoles has not been reached, especially in what concerns their relations to their initial stages called Pidgins. Lefebvre (2004: 6) states that some Pidgins used as second language have expanded as Creoles. Hancock (1980: 64) states: ‘‘I prefer not to acknowledge a distinction between pidgin and creole, and to consider stabilisation more significant than nativisation in creole language formation’’. Ansaldo and Matthews (2007: 14) conclude that ‘‘creole exceptionalism is a set of sociohistorically-rooted dogmas, with foundation in (neo-) colonial power relations, not a scientific conclusion based on robust empirical evidence’’. Bakker and Parkvall’s (2005: 512) answer to the question whether reduplication is ascribable or not to Pidgins, mentioned above, is that ‘‘reduplication is rare in pidgins, [but] almost universal in creoles’’. Reduplication seems to have been presented as one hallmark of creolisation, even though Mehrotra (1997) uses reduplication in a work that argues for the existence of Indian Pidgin English. The question one should ask here is whether the presence of reduplication in a Pidgin can spell it out as a Creole.

210

Bonaventure M. Sala

This study has shown that reduplication is a generally productive, morphological process in CPE. If the above qualification were to be applied, CPE would be considered a Creole today. This is important because there is little consensus as to whether CPE can be considered a creole the way it is always seen from a nativisation perspective. Recent statements on CPE suggest that it has now achieved the status of a Creole. Crystal (1987: 338) defines CPE as ‘‘An English-based pidgin, creolised in some urban areas, used in Cameroon as a second language by some 2 million speakers’’. Schro¨der (2003: 85) also refers to CPE as an ‘‘expanded pidgin’’, and argues that, ‘‘although still denominated as ‘pidgin’ by its speakers, CPE has in many areas acquired the status of a creole’’. Mackenzie (2002: 1) declares that Kamtok, as CPE is also called especially in research circles, is not a Pidgin but rather a Creole ‘‘since it is a fully-fledged language learned by children from their mothers’’. Atindogbe´ and Chibaka in their chapter in this volume also consider CPE a Creole and advance increasing numbers for its native speakers between 1983 and 2006. The question of the number of Cameroonians who acquire Pidgin from their mothers has been timidly quantified in some towns and not across the whole country. The following questions stem from these remarks: Can there be partial creolisation in a country? To how many Cameroonians is CPE a native language? Can a Creole develop in a region that has other implanted means of communication such as English and French playing wide ranges of functions? Can a language considered a lingua franca also be called a Creole, given that a lingua franca serves a communicative purpose for people in a region where there are diverse first languages in use? However, my opinion is that CPE remains for the most parts a second language for its users in Cameroon. There may be some first language users like in the case of children born of bi-ethnic parents. But immediately these rare firstlanguage-CPE users lack a first language community in which to develop their CPE; it boils down to the fact that it is still a kind of reduced language for them. In fact, some observation of the linguistic landscape in Cameroon is likely to show that there may be more native speakers of Cameroon English than there are native speakers of CPE. This is due to the now popular practice of talking English to children from birth, which, though at first limited to educated parents, is now spreading to even semieducated parents. Hancock’s (1980: 64) preference of stabilisation over nativisation in the qualification of Creole language formation could be applied here. This means that a Pidgin may expand without necessarily being a native language to its users.

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

211

10. Conclusion Reduplication is an important lexical process in CPE because it is productive and systematic, playing many functions. First, we have seen that some words are inherently reduplicated because their base forms are not words in the language. Huber (1999: 244) finds similar cases in GPE. He calls them ‘‘lexicalised reduplications’’ and ascribes the phenomenon to words that were loans from Krio (via Nigerian Pidgin English), which tend to maintain their original tone patterns (the low-high pattern). The presence of inherent reduplication in CPE throws some insight into reduplication research. If reduplication is defined as the doubling of a word or part of a word, it means that the word must first of all exist in the language. Reduplication has been treated in the literature as a creative process of deriving more words from existing ones. The creativity aspect of reduplication is weakened by inherent reduplication because words could enter a Pidgin or creole already reduplicated. In any case, from a point of view of language as a system, inherent reduplication stems from bound morphemes, irrespective of their origins. Inherent reduplication, or ‘‘lexicalised reduplication’’, necessitates a redefinition of the word ‘‘reduplication’’. Reduplication would be defined simply as a word with two or more similar segments or morphemes, one being the copy of the other. Second, we have seen that reduplication applies to adjectives and adverbs for the purpose of intensification, which is represented in BrE by ‘very’. Thirdly, the process applies to nouns to bring out an idea of restriction found in the English ‘only’. Fourthly, when it applies to verbs, it has aspectual connotations. It can show a repetitive (iterative) aspect when used with a singular su¤erer and the distributive aspect when used with a plural su¤erer. Hence, Dem chu`k-chu´k yi, is repetitive (They pierced him several times) if the action took place repeatedly and distributive (They pierced him all over) if the action was spread over the body. Some confluence exists between both aspects when used with plural nouns. Some subject/verb or instrument/verb concord holds between a reduplicated verb and its arguments. It has equally been seen that reduplication also expresses the one-to-one mappings seen in the English ‘each’. We have also seen that tonal variations are important. Where the tone of the root word is changed, the regular pattern observed is low-high. Reduplication in CPE is not a finite process but an infinite one. This means that there are no particular words in CPE that can, or cannot, be reduplicated. Any word in the language, with the exception of some function words (see the expression Na we-we:

212

Bonaventure M. Sala

‘‘I have an axe to grind with you.’’), can be reduplicated to play any of the grammatical functions listed above. In the literature, some Pidgins reduplicate function words. For example, the Usuri dialect of Chinese uses kakoj-kakoj to mean ‘some’ or ‘any’, where kakoj means ‘what’ (Bakker and Parkvall 2005: 513). Bakker and Parkvall (2005) also explore a situation where in Asia interrogative pronouns are reduplicated to form indefinite pronouns. Generally, function words are not candidates for reduplication in CPE. Compared to BrE (as seen in such few cases as goody-goody, so-so, tomtom), reduplication in CPE goes beyond the lexeme to engulf grammatical processes. When it applies to nouns, it plays an intensificative role, shows limitation or marks the one-to-one mapping. When used with verbs, it has aspectual properties. In addition, reduplication a¤ects CPE tonology. These are grammatical categories that give the study of reduplication in CPE great relevance. It is therefore clear that reduplication in CPE presents regular patterns worthy of study. Every learner of CPE will need to understand how reduplication functions in order to be creative and e¤ective in the language. The categories such as intensification, limitation, aspect, and one-to-one mapping are lexicalised in English or marked by clear-cut morphemes and expressions, but are realised using reduplication in CPE. We can characterise the CPE lexical system as making maximum use of minimum means, which spells out its simplificative dimension. This conclusion could be buttressed in the study of another conjoining process in CPE like compounding (see Sala 2010). This is the challenge of future research in the domain.

References Ansaldo, Umberto, Stephen Matthews and Lisa Lim (eds.). 2007. Deconstructing Creole. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Ansaldo, Umberto and Stephen Matthews. 2007. Deconstructing creole: The rationale. In: Ansaldo, Umbedrto et al. (eds.), pp. 1–18. Awah, Pius (ed.). 1981. Pidgin English Prayer Book. Revised and extended from the original translation of Mgr Joseph Plissonneau. Ayafor, Miriam. 1996. An orthography for Kamtok. English Today 12(4): 53–57. Ayafor, Miriam. 2000. Kamtok: The ultimate unifying common national language for Cameroon. The Carrier Pidgin 28: 4–6. Babawilly. 2001. Dictionary of Pidgin English Words and Phrases. Available online at www.ngex.com/personalities/babawilly/dictionary/pidgina.htm. Accessed 29 January 2010.

Reduplication in Cameroon Pidgin English

213

Bakker, Peter and Mikael Parkvall. 2005. Reduplication in pidgins and creoles. In: Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), pp. 511–524. Bickerton, Derek. 1984. The language bioprogram hypothesis. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 7: 173–221. Bloomfield, Leonard. 1984. Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Crystal, David. 1987. The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dressler, Wolgang U., Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, Natalia Gargarina and Mariane Kilani-Schoch. 2005. Reduplication in child language. In: Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), pp. 455–474. Gooden, Shelome. 2003. Reduplication in Jamaican Creole: Semantic functions and prosodic constraints. In: Kouwenberg, Silvia (ed.), pp. 93–103. Hancock, Ian F. 1980. Lexical expansion in creole languages. In: Valdman, Albert and Arthur R. Highfield (eds.), Theoretical Orientations in Creole Studies. New York: Academic Press. 63–87. Holm, John. 1988. Pidgins and Creoles. Vols. 1 & 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huber, Magnus. 1999. Ghanaian Pidgin English in its West African Context. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Huber, Magnus. 2003. Verbal reduplication in Ghanaian Pidgin English: Origins, forms and functions. In: Kouwenberg, Silvia (ed.), pp. 139–154. Hurch, Bernhard (ed.). 2005. Studies on Reduplication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Kouwenberg, Silvia (ed.). 2003. Twice as Meaningful: Reduplication in Pidgins, Creoles and Other Contact Languages. London: Battlebridge. Lefebvre, Claire. 2004. Issues in the Study of Pidgin and Creole Languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Leroy, Marie and Aliyah Morgenstern. 2005. Reduplication before age of two. In: Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), pp. 475–491. Mackenzie, Lachlan J. 2002. Cameroon Pidgin English: A Grammatical Sketch. Available online at http://cursus.let.vu.nl/engels/kamtok.htm. Accessed 29 April 2003. Mehrotra, Raja Ram. 1997. Reduplication in Indian Pidgin English. English Today 13(2): 45–49. Moravcsik, Edith. 1978. Reduplicative constructions. In: Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.), Universals of Human Language. Vol. 3. Word Structure. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 297–334. Mutaka, Ngessimo M. 1994. The Lexical Tonology of Kinande. Mu¨nchen: LINCOM. Ngome, Manasseh. 1984. Cameroon Pidgin English Dictionary Project: A Preliminary Basic Word List. Unpublished mimeograph, Department of English, The University of Yaounde. Rubino, Carl. 2005. Reduplication: Form, function and distribution. In: Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), pp. 11–30. Sala, Bonaventure M. 2009. Writing in Cameroon Pidgin English: Begging the question. English Today 25(2): 11–17.

214

Bonaventure M. Sala

Sala, Bonaventure M. 2010. Is Cameroon Pidgin a tone language? Revisiting a former statement. The Carrier Pidgin. Sala, Bonaventure M. and Aloysius Ngefac. 2006. The depidginisation process in Cameroon Pidgin English. PhiN 36: 31–43. http://web.fu-berlin.de/phin/ phin36/p36i.htm. Accessed 10 June 2009. Schneider, Gilbert D. 1960. Cameroons Creole Dictionary. Bamenda, West Cameroon: Cameroon Baptist Mission. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Gunter Narr. Urbanczyk, Suzanne. 2005. Enhancing contrast in reduplication. In: Hurch, Bernhard (ed.), pp. 211–237.

Chapter 10 Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka1 1. Introduction2 The rapid growth of Cameroon Pidgin English3 (CPE) and its importance in Cameroon justifies the curiosity of researchers about it, which is visible in the growing amount of literature on this English-based Creole. Despite the increased interest in CPE, many aspects of its grammar remain unexplored. Pronouns are on top of the list of these unexplored or underexplored linguistic aspects. Other under-explored aspects include CPE phraseology, tense and aspect system (see Schro¨der 2003a, this volume), prosody, and syntax. The goal of this chapter is to contribute to the understanding of an aspect of CPE grammar which, so far, has received little attention from researchers. The focus here is on identifying and describing the functions and contexts of usage of the various pronouns that are found in the language. These include: personal, possessive, reflexive, emphatic, demonstrative, interrogative, relative, reciprocal, and indefinite pronouns. The description, done under the tenets of the structuralist framework, permits us to submit a synchronic analysis of CPE in a society where communica-

1. This chapter was written while we were in Germany as Alexander von Humbolt research fellows. Gratien G. Atindogbe´ was at the Universita¨t zu Ko¨ln while Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka was at the University of Hamburg. We wish to thank our hosts, Anne Storch (Ko¨ln) and Roland Kiessling (Hamburg), and the Alexander von Humbolt Foundation for the two year research grants. 2. We wish to extend our gratitude to Eric A. Anchimbe for not only suggesting the idea of this chapter, but also for the constructive remarks and comments on its earlier versions. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. All remaining shortcomings are entirely ours. 3. Several terms have been used to name this Pidgin: Pidgin English (PE), e.g. Mbassi-Manga (1973), Alobwede (1998), Mbufong (2001); Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE), e.g. Todd (1979), Menang (2008), Kouega (2008); Kamtok, e.g. Todd and Jumbam (1992); Ayafor (1996, 2000, 2006, 2008), and Cameroon Pidgin (CamP), e.g. Schro¨der (2003b).

216

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

tion has made language contact more frequent than before due to economic and technological advancement. The data used here are from observation of social interactions between speakers of CPE, individual and group interviews, and elicitation. The native-speaker knowledge of CPE by one of the authors was equally an inexhaustible source of inspiration to cross-check and to confirm the data collected from informants. CPE has several varieties, with variation found at the level of lexis and syntax (cf. Schro¨der 2003b, Mbangwana 2004, etc.). Most of the informants used for the present study are speakers of the Grassland and Coastal varieties of CPE. These two are the major Anglophone varieties, and since CPE is generally spoken in the Anglophone zone, findings based on these varieties could be generalised to the rest of the CPE-speaking community. The rest of the chapter is structured as follows: in section 2 we provide a brief overview of the evolutionary phases of CPE in Cameroon. Section 3 discusses the pronouns of CPE while section 4 presents the conclusions.

2. From Cameroon Pidgin English to mother-tongue Today, three undeniable facts characterise CPE: it has a fast growing number of native speakers; its roles are rapidly expanding into both public and private domains; and its grammar has substantially stabilised. The phonology and some aspects of the grammar have been described by Menang (2004) and Ayafor (2008) respectively. So, CPE has ceased to be the makeshift language that it was in the 1960s; or the language that did not seem to satisfy all the linguistic needs of its users (cf. Todd 1982a, b, 1990), and has now become a mother-tongue for many people. Statistics from research surveys between 1983 and 2006 show that about 20%4 of Cameroonians surveyed use it as first language, i.e. as mother tongue. Its ability to serve its users has been aided to various degrees by its evolu4. We arrived at this figure by calculatinig the average of existing percentages on statistics on big cities published between 1983 and 2006. These include: Limbe (31%) (Mbangwana 1983: 87); Douala (10%), Kumba (22%), Mamfe (25%) (Alobwede 1998: 54); Bamenda (36.2%), Bertoua (6.8%), Buea (42.3%), Dschang (4.7%), Ebolowa (1.6%), Maroua (9.3%), Yaounde´ (30.4%) (Schro¨der 2003: 85). In case there were statistics available from the three authors on the same city, we selected the highest percentage. For identical statistics on the same city from the authors, we selected the most recent.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

217

tionary trajectory which is marked by its progressive adoption of more local elements (especially lexical items and syntax from Cameroon indigenous languages) into its system, its spread into domains like the media previously monopolised by the o‰cial languages (English and French), and the growing numbers of those who use it as a native language. The following statistics speak for themselves: – Around the mid 1960s, 85% of the lexicon of CPE came from English, 13% from indigenous languages and 2% from other languages including French and Portuguese (Schneider 1966: 5). – In the early 1970s, the lexicon of CPE consisted of 80% English, 14% indigenous languages, 5% French, and 1% from other languages (Mbassi-Manga 1973). – In the 1980s, CPE was the most widely used and understood of all varieties of English spoken in Cameroon (Todd 1982a: 19). Todd (1982b) provides statistics showing that the language had not only grown stronger in the percentage of speakers but also, it had spread to Francophone towns hence attracting more French-speaking Cameroonians. – Also in the 1980s, research started focusing on the nativisation of CPE (cf. Koenig 1983: 48). Additionally, Koenig et al. (1983) show that CPE was not only a lingua franca in the Anglophone regions but also progressively in the French-speaking regions. – The 1990s was characterised by three major developments: 1) an unavoidable di¤erentiation in the continuum CPE-Cameroon English (CamE) where the two speech forms were to be seen as two di¤erent languages (cf. Hansen 1993, Chumbow and Simo Bobda 1995); 2) the significant spread of CPE into domains hitherto monopolised by English and French (cf. Chumbow and Simo Bobda 1996); 3) CPE emerged as native language or L1 or mother-tongue for many Cameroonian children (cf. Alobwede 1998). – In the 2000s, CPE has gained substantial numbers of native speakers and has considerably expanded its functions. It is heard on governmentowned as well as private radio stations (cf. Schro¨der 2003b). Mackenzie (2002: 1), therefore, describes CPE as ‘‘a fully-fledged language learned by children from their mothers.’’ 3. CPE pronouns Pronouns are words that can replace a noun, a noun phrase or sometimes other sentence constituents (cf. Swann et al. 2004). Thus, pronouns are

218

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

pro-forms or words that substitute for other words, phrases, clauses, or sentences, whose meaning is recoverable from the linguistic or extralinguistic context. The aim of this investigation is to show that CPE has a system of its own, which should be succinctly described in order to place the language within the broader realm of Creole studies. In order to be able to make linguistically significant statements, we shall contrast our results with some earlier works done on CPE and other pidgins like Nigerian Pidgin, which is very much related to the CPE. 3.1. Personal pronouns Personal pronouns replace proper or common nouns. They are divided into subjective and objective pronouns. Due to their closeness, we describe the CPE subjective and the objective pronouns together in this section. Consider the following pronouns in Table 1: Table 1. Personal pronouns in CPE

Singular

Plural

Subjective forms

Objective forms

1st person

a

‘I’

mi

‘me’

2nd person

yu

‘you’

yu

‘you’

3rd person

i

‘he/ she/ it’

yi

‘him/her’

am

‘it’

1st person

wi

‘we’

wi

‘us’

2nd person

wuna

‘you’

wuna

‘you’

3rd person

dey

‘they’

dem

‘them’

As Table 1 shows, CPE has six subjective and seven objective forms of personal pronouns: four singular and three plural. Their features include person (1st, 2nd and 3rd persons), number (singular and plural: yu/wuna), semantic class, morphological class, semantic case (agent, patient), usage (context), spatial and temporal position. Apart from the 1st and 3rd person singular, i.e. a vs. mi and i vs. yi/am, all the forms in the subjective and objective case are identical. The examples in (1) provide some illustrations of subject personal pronouns while those in (2) present their object counterparts.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

(1) a.

a di 1sg Subj Prog

kam. come

‘I am coming.’

b.

yu` go 2sg Subj Fut

go! go

‘You will go!’

c.

´ı dong chop. 3sg Subj P1 eat

d.

wı` 1pl Subj

bi P2

dong P1

e.

wuna 2pl Subj

di Prog

shidong? sit down

‘Are you sitting?’

f.

dey 3pl Subj

go Fut

si. see

‘They will see.’

(2) a.

´ı di 3sg Subj Prog

push push

dong folo P1 follow

‘S/he, it has eaten.’ run. run

‘We had run.’

mi. me

‘S/he, it is pushing me.’

yuˆ. you

‘They have followed you.’

yıˆ. him

‘I will warn/shout at him/her.’ ‘You have insulted us.’

b.

dey 3pl Subj

c.

a go 1sg Subj Fut

d.

yu` dong kosh 2sg Subj P1 insult

wi. us

e.

wı` 1pl Subj

go Fut

slap slap

wuna ‘We will slap you (pl).’ you

f.

wuna 2pl Subj

di Prog

kol call

dem. them

hala warn

219

‘You are calling them.’

Morphologically, only the 1st person singular subject and object di¤er completely: a vs. mi (1a vs. 2a). The 2nd and 3rd persons singular as well as the 1st person plural are similar, except in their tones: yu` vs. yuˆ (cf. 1b vs. 2b); ´ı vs. yıˆ (cf. 1c vs. 2c); and wı` vs. wıˆ (cf. 1d vs. 2d). As for the last two plural forms, they are similar in all respects: wuna and wuna (1e and 2e); dem and dem (1f and 2f ). Syntactically, the first person singular subject a ‘I’ can only be used as a subject pronoun (3a), and never as object pronoun (3b).

220

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

(3) a. b.

a I

di Prog

go go

fo to

fam. ‘I am going to the farm.’ farm

*i dong gif a. he P1 give I

‘He gave me.’

Conversely, the object pronoun mi cannot be used in CPE as subject substitute (4) (4)

*mi I

di go Prog go

fo fam. to farm

‘I am going to the farm.’

However, a combination of both forms at sentence initial position is possible to mark emphasis (5a vs. 5b): (5) a.

b.

a di go fo maket. I Prog go to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [simple declaration] mi a di go fo maket. me I Prog go to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [focus on subject of action]

Also, the object pronoun can be used at post-verbal position in conjunction with the subject pronoun. The aim is to add pragmatic information to the utterance (6). (6) a di go mi fo maket. I Prog go me to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [simple declaration þ pragmatic information: really going to the market] The pragmatic information expressed above could be likened to what Ayafor (2008) refers to as the expression of ‘strong will’ and ‘careless attitude’. Ayafor (2008: 437–438), for example, describes the sentence in (7a) as expressing a strong will and the one in (7b) as expressing a careless attitude. (7) a.

b.

a di go mi fo mimbo haus.

i di chop yi.

‘I am going [me] to the drinking parlour/bar’ (i.e. I really want to go to the bar). ‘He/she is eating [him/her].’ (i.e. he/she is actually eating despite all)

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

221

When subject focus and pragmatic information are crucial for the message, the object pronoun appears in series as in (8): (8) mi a di go mi fo maket. me I Prog go me to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [focus on subject þ pragmatic information] Even in the constructions in (6) and (8) above, the pronoun a cannot be used in place of mi, as shown by the odd sentences in (9). (9) a.

b.

*a di go a fo maket. I Prog go me to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [simple declaration þ pragmatic information] *mi a di go a fo maket. me I Prog go me to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [focus on subject þ pragmatic information]

Finally, in a construction like (10), the two pronouns stacked at sentence initial position cannot be reversed: (10) *a mi di go mi fo maket. I me Prog go me to market ‘I am going to the market.’ [focus on subject þ pragmatic information] Thus, although one can use both the subject and object pronoun forms at sentence initial position within the same sentence, they obey a strict syntactic co-occurrence restriction. The mi form must always come before the a form for such a combination to be grammatically correct (5b). If otherwise, it would be incorrect as in the odd sentence (10). On the other hand, though mi can be positioned at sentence initial (5b), and/or postverbal in utterances like (6) and (8); a can never occur elsewhere except in the subject position. This explains why (9a) and (9b) are incorrect. It is for this reason that Faraclas (1996: 177), in his description of Nigerian Pidgin, calls a a bound pronoun, i.e. a pronoun that is dependent on verbs for which their referents function as argument. He advances a four classdistinction5 of personal pronouns which includes: free and bound, subject and free, and bound object. 5. For reasons of simplicity and in order to remain as close as possible to the structure of the language, we prefer to stick to the two class-distinction format presented in Table 1.

222

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

The use of both pronouns at sentence initial position to mark emphasis is equally seen in Nigerian Pidgin where Faraclas considers it as dislocated emphatic pronoun under topicalisation. Schneider (1966), in an earlier analysis of such constructions, considers the first pronoun (i.e. mi) as an independent pronoun, and the second (i.e. a) as dependent pronoun. The independent pronouns may function as subject or object. When they function as subject, they always bear a high tone (cf. Schneider 1966: 11)6 as in the following examples: (11) mı´, a mo´s go´w simo´l-taim. ‘I must go soon.’ pi pd a V AD yu´ na mı´ we gow go´w simo´l-taim. ‘You and I will go soon.’ pi pi pd a V AD ´ı pi

no´w fı´t no a

wı´ mo´s pi a

sı´ng. V

tra´i-am. ‘We must try it.’ V

wu´na fo de´y, pi AD de´m pi

‘He can’t sing’

ko´m V

hı´a. ‘You over there, come here’ AD

fo

di finis-am ol-ol. a V AD

‘They are finishing everything’ Schneider (1966: 66)

As for the dependent pronouns, Schneider (1966: 67) says that they ‘‘serve as cross reference markers. They are the first item in the verb phrase and must agree with the subject in both number and person. The dependent pronouns take low tone’’. He proposes the following sentences to illustrate the dependent pronouns: (12) a bı´ yu ko´mbi. pd bi dp N ma´sa, N ta´ga, N

yu di pd a i pd

bigı´n V

‘I’m your friend.’

fı´ba? ‘Sir, do you have a fever?’ N cho´p-am. V

‘The leopard began to eat it.’

6. Schneider (1966) marked tones in his description. The high tone is marked by the acute accent while the low tone is unmarked.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

223

mı´ na jo´s, wi gow go´w tude´y. ‘George and I are going today.’ pi na N pd a V AD ´ı na yu´, wuna no´w gow lu´k cho´p fo ma´ket. pi na pi pd now V V N N ‘You and he will not find food at the market.’ mı´sis witi pikı´n, dem do´n ko´m. ‘Mrs. and the children came.’ N N pd a V Schneider (1966: 67) The sequence ‘mi a . . .’ at sentence initial position, which we analysed as focussing and addition of pragmatic information, was treated by Todd (1979) as an emphatic construction. She wrote: In the first person singular two forms are shown, mi a and a, the former showing emphasis: a go go mi a go go

I’ll go I’ll go

(i.e. I and no one else). Todd (1979: 181)

Another striking element about CPE personal pronouns is the distinction between yi ‘him, her’ and am ‘it’, i.e., the 3rd person singular of the object pronouns. The example in (13b), a version of (13a) shows that am ‘it’ appears as an object pronoun for non-animate nouns (13a) and that the pronoun yi (13c) cannot be used in those constructions. (13) a.

b.

i get fo chop dis fufu taim weh i s/he get Prep eat this fufu Cond it ‘She/he has to eat this fufu when it is hot.’ i get fo chop am taim weh i di s/he get Prep eat it when it cop ‘She/he has to eat it when it is hot.’

c. *i get fo chop yi taim weh i s/he get Prep eat it when it ‘She/he has to eat it when it is hot.’

di hot. cop hot hot. hot

di hot. cop hot

What we are stating here is that the object dis fufu ‘this fufu’ can be replaced by the third person pronoun am ‘it’ (13b), but not with the third person object pronoun yi ‘it’ as in (11c) since the object is non-animate.

224

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

Thus, the di¤erence between the object pronouns of the 3rd person, yi vs. am, resides in the fact that the object replaced embeds the semantic trait [þanimate]. The first replaces an object with the feature [þanimate] while the second substitutes a noun which is [-animate]. In the examples below, the noun pusi ‘cat’ (14a) is replaced by yıˆ in the copulative statement in (14b) or (14c). (14) a.

da pusi di kam bak. ‘That cat is coming back.’ that cat Prog come back

b.

No! no bi No Neg is

yıˆ. it

‘No! It is not it’ or ‘it is not the one.’

c.

na yıˆ Cop it

swe. swear

‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one, I swear!’

a I

Obviously, the object pronoun am cannot be used in the place of yıˆ as in (15b) and (15c): (15) a.

da pusi di kam bak. ‘That cat is coming back.’ that cat Prog come back

b.

*No! no bi Neg Neg is

am. it

‘No! It is not it’ or ‘it is not the one’

c.

*na am a Cop it I

swe. swear

‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one, I swear!’

However, with a noun carrying a [-animate] feature like ‘house’ the object pronoun am which is expected, cannot still be used when embedded in a copulative structure. (16) a. da haus dong fol that house P1 fall

egen ‘That house has fallen again.’ again

b. *No! no Neg Neg

bi is

am. it

‘No! It is not it’ or ‘it is not the one’

c. *na am Cop it

a I

swe. swear

‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one.’

The appropriate object pronoun in such a context is yıˆ despite the feature [-animate] in the noun ‘house’ (17).

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

(17) a. da haus dong fol that house P1 fall

225

egen. ‘That house has fallen again.’ again

b. No! no Neg Neg

bi is

yıˆ. it

‘No! It is not it’ or ‘it is not the one.’

c. na yıˆ, Cop it

a I

swe. swear

‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one, I swear.’

In the same way, (18a) is acceptable whereas (18b) is odd: (18) a. b.

na Cop

yıˆ. it

*na Cop

am. ‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one.’ it

‘It is it’ or ‘it is the one.’

But if we take the same noun ‘house’ in the sentence below, it is replaced by am: (19) a. b.

i get fo bon da haus. ‘She/he has to burn that house.’ s/he get Prep burn that house i get fo bon am. ‘She/he has to burn it.’ s/he get Prep burn it

c. *i get fo bon yıˆ. ‘She/he has to burn it.’ s/he get Prep burn it This unique property of ‘haus’ which makes it to accommodate the pronouns yıˆ and am in di¤erent contexts goes to explain that there are some nouns in CPE that have dual status as far as their animate vs. inanimate categorisation is concerned. This dual status for the noun ‘haus’ is not normally conditioned by the verb in the construction but rather by the original position of the noun. This explains why the ‘haus’ in the subject position in example (17a) can only be replaced by the 3rd person subject personal pronoun yıˆ in (17b), while the same noun located at the object position can only take the 3rd person object personal pronoun am as in (19b). Despite this unique property of some nouns, it does not change the fact that the object pronoun is predominantly am for non-animate nouns. This fact was reported in earlier studies of CPE such as Todd (1979: 181) who says:

226

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

In the idiolects of older and more conservative speakers the third person object pronoun in both singular and plural is am, which is a bound morpheme: a geht tri pikin / a gehtam I have three children / I have them a geht wan pikin / a gehtam I have one child / I have it Increasingly, however, dei is replacing dem as the third personal plural nominative pronoun, and there is a growing tendency to use -am when referring to inanimate objects, i for animate singular and dem for animate plurals.

3.2. Possessive pronouns The possessive pronouns or what Schneider (1966: 64–5) refers to as pronoun determiners are marked for all the person and number distinctions possible in the language. This type of pronoun always occurs as the modifier of the noun in a possessive construction. The di¤erent types of possessive pronouns in CPE are summarised in Table 2. Table 2. Possessive pronouns in CPE

Singular

Plural

Position

Weak possessive pronouns

Strong possessive pronouns

1st person

ma

‘my’

ma on

‘mine’

2nd person

ya

‘your’

ya on

‘yours’

3rd person

yi

‘his, her, its’

yi on

‘his-, hers,

1st person

wi

‘our’

wi on7

‘ours’

2nd person

wuna

‘your’

wuna on

‘yours’

3rd person

dia

‘their’

dia on

‘theirs’

The sentences in (20) illustrate the use of the weak possessive in CPE. It always comes before the noun it is modifying or describing: (20) a.

b.

ma sista di go yı´ fo waitman kontri. my sister Prog go 3sg Prep Whiteman country ‘My sister is travelling to Europe.’ yua sista i pikin i di shidong fo ma haus. your sister her child he Prog reside Prep my house ‘Your niece/nephew is residing at my place/house.’

7. Sometimes this is realised as ‘wa on’ and ‘wia on’.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

227

In CPE, there is actually no distinction between the various types of possession: alienable vs. inalienable, temporary vs. permanent, etc. The strong possessive pronouns are composed of the weak possessive forms þ on ‘own’ as in (21): (21) dis fau na ma on.8 wu sai yua on de?

‘This fowl is mine.’ ‘Where is yours?’

The modified/possessed nominal slot in possessive constructions is filled by the possessive pronominal on ‘own’ which is used in CPE to indicate possession and to refer anaphorically to an entire assertion. 3.3. Reflexive pronouns Reflexive pronouns are composed of the possessive pronouns þ sef (self/ selves). They are derived from each of the six persons as illustrated in Table 3: Table 3. Reflexive pronouns in CPE

Singular

Plurar

Position

Simple reflexive

Gloss

1st person

masef

‘myself ’

2nd person

y(u)asef

‘yourself ’

3rd person

yı`sef

‘him-, her-, itself ’

1st person

w(i)asef

‘ourselves’

2nd person

wunasef

‘yourselves’

3rd person

diasef

‘themselves’

Unlike the possessive pronouns, the reflexive pronouns do not occur as nominal modifiers in their associative constructions. CPE reflexive pronouns can occur in any reflexive object position where the complement of the verb is the same as the subject in relation to its nominal features. As such, there is bound to be agreement in nominal features between the subject and the reflexive form (22):

8. Note that possession can also be expressed by the use of the phrasal verb ‘get am’ or simply ‘get’ as reported by Ayafor (2008: 436–7): Dis pusi na ma on ‘This cat is mine’ can be said Dis pusi na mi get am ‘I own this cat’ or Na mi get dis pusi ‘I am the owner of this cat’.

228

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

(22) a. b.

i dong kot yı`sef ‘S/he has cut himself/herself.’ s/he P1 cut himself/herself wuna laik wunasef plenti. ‘You love yourselves very much.’ you love yourselves very much

c. a laik masef. ‘I like myself.’ I like myself d.

wi go kill wi(a)sef. ‘We will kill ourselves.’ we fut kill ourselves The reflexive pronoun can stand alone to mark an astonishment or indirect question. In that case, it is a reaction to a story told by someone, or a funny behaviour from a third party (23). (23) a. b.

Yusef ! yourself

‘You too!’

Wunasef ! yourselves

‘You too (pl.)!’

The yusef ! here means, ‘‘You too! How can you behave like that?’’ or ‘‘how can you think that way?’’ or, ‘‘how can you do such a thing?’’ As a verbal reaction to a statement such as ‘‘yusef!’’, one can say (24): (24) masef hao? Weti do? myself how what so? ‘Me too how? ‘So what?’ The reflexive -sef can be used in object position to express reciprocity (25): (25) wi we

laik like

dem laik they like

wisef / wasef. ourselves demsef. themselves

‘We like each other / one another.’

‘They like each other / one another.’

As seen above, CPE reflexives occur in object position. However, when found in subject position, the reflexive has another semantic implication, i.e., emphasis, which is discussed in section 3.4. Our analysis of reflexive pronouns di¤ers slightly from Ayafor’s (2008) who says that there are only composed reflexive pronouns in CPE as illustrated in (26). She thinks that reflexive forms are constructed through a reduplication of the morpheme sef ‘self ’: sef-sef.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

(26) Yu sef-sef yu go go fo hospitel. Yu bi kuk de chop yu sef-sef. Yi sef-sef bi wash de klos dem.

229

‘You will go to the hospital by yourself.’ ‘You cooked the food yourself.’ ‘He/she did the laundry him-/herself.’ (Ayafor 2008: 437)

However, it also possible to use the simple form and not the reduplicated form as in Ayafor’s sentences to yield the same meaning as shown in (27): (27) a. Yusef yu go go fo hospitel. ‘You will go to the hospital by yourself.’ / ‘You will go to the hospital on your own.’ b.

Yu bi kuk de chop yusef.

‘You cooked the food yourself.’

c.

Yisef bi wash de klos dem.

‘He/she did the laundry him-/herself.’

Also note that the sentences in (26) and (27) can have some interpretations (in square brackets and italics) as illuatrated in (28): (28) Yu sef-sef yu go go fo hospitel. ‘You will go to the hospital by yourself.’ [nobody will accompany you] Yu bi kuk de chop yu sef-sef.

‘You cooked the food yourself.’ [not anyone else, nobody helped you. . .]

Yi sef-sef bi wash de klos dem.

‘He/she did the laundry him-/herself.’ [nobody helped him/her, he/she is a big boy/girl ] (Ayafor 2008: 437)

The idea of emphasis or additional information (e.g. exclusivity) is more transparent when we compare the sentences in (29) below: (29) a. Take dis planti chop. ‘Take this plantain and eat. A kukam just naw so.

I just cooked it.’ [ flat statement]

b.

Take dis planti chop. Na mi (a) kukam.

‘Take this plantain and eat. I cooked it. (I am the one who cooked it.)’ [subject focus: it is me who cooked it, not X. . .]

c.

Take dis planti chop. Na misef a kukam.

‘Take this plantain and eat. I cooked it myself.’ [same as in (b)]

d.

Take dis planti chop. Na misef-sef a kukam.

‘Take this plantain and eat. I cooked it myself.’ [I personally, not X, I put special touch in cooking it, I took time to cook it. So, it is excellent! ]

230

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

The examples in (29) permit us to assume that a distinction should be made between reflexive pronouns and emphatic pronouns. The latter, as we shall see below, seem to occur in sentence initial or pre-subject position in the unmarked case. 3.4. Emphatic pronouns We propose the two sets of emphatic pronouns in Table 4: Table 4. Emphatic pronouns in CPE

Singular

Plurar

Position

Simple emphatic

Composed emphatic

Gloss

1st person

misef

misef-sef

‘myself ’

2nd person

yusef

yusef-sef

‘yourself ’

3rd person

Yı´sef 9

yı´sef-sef

‘him-, her-, itself ’

1st person

wisef/wesef

wisef-sef

‘ourselves’

2nd person

wunasef

wunasef-sef

‘yourselves’

3rd person

demsef

demsef-sef

‘themselves’

Both simple and composed emphatic forms are productively used in CPE. The nuance between the two sets lies in the degree or the gradation in the emphatic statement. As said before, what we treat as composed emphatic here is what Ayafor (2008) calls composed reflexive pronouns. See the sentences in (27) and (28) for illustration of both sets of emphatic forms. The argument that prompts a clear distinction between the reflexive and emphatic pronouns lies in the evidence that while the reflexive occurs at object position, the emphatic pronoun is solely located at sentence initial position preceding the subject. For example, masef (reflexive) and misef (emphatic) do not share the same syntactic distribution. Let us consider the following sentences, (30) and (31): (30) a. misef a laik am. ‘I also like it.’ b. misef a laik masef. ‘I also like myself.’ c. misef a no sure sey a laik milik. ‘I also (I too) or even I am not sure that I like milk’ (31) a. *masef a laik am. ‘I also like it.’ b. *masef a laik masef. ‘I also like myself.’ c. *masef a no sure sey a laik milik. I also (I too) or even I am not sure that I like milk.’ 9. Note yı´sef (emphatic) vs. yı`sef (reflexive).

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

231

The sentences in (30) are acceptable in CPE, while those in (31) are not. Furthermore, misef occurs in sentence initial or pre-subject position, acting as the syntactic element that helps to place the subject into focus. Since masef cannot occupy that position, we then conclude that we are dealing with two sets of pronouns. Note that the composed forms of emphatic pronouns can replace the simple ones with the nuance of insistence (I, and not anybody else, or I, X. . .) as in (32): (32) a. misef-sef a laik am. ‘I myself I like it’ b. misef-sef a laik masef. ‘I personnally like myself.’ c. misef-sef a no sure sey a laik milik. I also (I too) or even I am not sure that I like milk.’ Similarly, the sentences in (33) with the composed forms placed in sentence final position are grammatically correct in CPE and do serve as emphatic pronouns: (33) a.

b.

a bi du am misef-sef. I P2 do it 1sg ‘I did it MYSELF.’ (not anybody else, so, it is well done!) wi bi tok fo chif yisef-sef. we P2 talk Prep chief himself ‘We spoke to the chief HIMSELF.’ (not to any other person. So, he received us. . .)

In order to mark unhappiness or exasperation about somebody or something, the emphatic pronoun can be used, followed by the personal pronoun, just like in: (34) a.

yusef yu know se a no laik am. yourself you know that I Neg like it ‘Even you know that I do not like it.’

The utterances in (35), with the particle na preceding can be syntactically di¤erent but semantically similar to the ones in (33): (35) a.

b.

na misef-sef bi du am. Cop myself P2 do it ‘I did it MYSELF.’ (not anybody else, so, it is well done!) na fo chif yisef-sef wi bi tok. Cop Prep chief himself we P2 talk ‘We spoke to the chief HIMSELF.’ (not to any other person. So, he received us. . .)

232

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

In CPE, it is possible to classify emphasis from weak to strong emphasis. This is done mostly when there is a proper noun as subject in the sentence. The strategy used for such gradation is the particle na, which in fact is meant to establish a ‘stronger relationship’ between the subject and the object of the verb. Ayafor (2008: 437) provides some examples (36) of such cases:10 (36) Simple emphasis Peter yi sef-sef bi kol mi fo chop-haus. ‘Peter himself invited me to the restaurant.’ Darekto yi sef-sef tek wi go parti. ‘The Director himself took us to the party.’

Strong emphasis Na Peter yi sef-sef bi kol mi fo chop-haus. ‘Peter himself invited me to the restaurant.’ Na Darekto yi sef-sef tek wi go parti. ‘The Director himself took us to the party.’

There are also instances where the emphatic pronoun is used in combination with the subject pronoun to provide the meaning ‘‘also’’, with the additional meaning of unhappiness, disappointment, or dissatisfaction (37). In this case, the reflexive is not placed in the object position but still to the left of the subject pronoun within the same sentence. (37) misef a di go´ tek ma bag go myself I Prog will take my bag go ‘I also, will take my bag and leave’

(mi) (me)

3.5. Demonstrative pronouns Demonstrative pronouns are deictic words that indicate whether the entities a speaker is referring to or distinguishing from other entities are close or far, in space or time, from the speaker at the time of speech. Just like many other languages, CPE makes a two-way distinction between the demonstratives: the proximal demonstratives indicating objects close to the speaker, and the distal demonstratives indicating objects removed from the speaker. CPE has four forms for marking precisions in objects or 10. Note that in these sentences, the personal pronoun is repeated after the noun: i.e., ‘Peter yi. . .’ or ‘Darekto yi. . .’ Such a syntactic construction is a characteristic of Bantu languages that has certainly been borrowed by CPE. The following Barombi sentences illustrate the point: Peter a` ka` k n ‘Peter will sing’; Peter £ nı` Paul £a´ ka´ kn Å Å ‘Peter and Paul will sing’.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

233

persons: two basic and two complex forms. They are presented in Table 5 below. Table 5. Demonstrative pronouns in CPE Demonstrative

Gloss

Reference

dis

‘this’

An object or person very close to the speaker

dat

‘that’

An object or person, which is distant from the speaker

dis X dem

‘these’

Many objects or persons (i.e. X) very close to the speaker

dat X dem

‘those’

Many objects or persons (i.e. X), distant from the speaker.

Singular

Plural

The examples in (38) below illustrate the di¤erent demonstratives: (38) a. b.

dis moto this car dat haus that house

c. wi go we Fut d.

na ma on. ‘This car is mine.’ Cop mine fain nice

mi. ‘I like that house.’ me

tek dis take this

wan dem. ‘We will take these.’ one them

dat wan dem dong spoil. that one them P1 spoil

‘Those [ones] are spoiled.’

In forming the plurals of the demonstrative, one has to add dem and the noun in question to dis or dat. Dis is used to refer to events in the present (actual or narrative) or in the proximal past or future, while dat is used in cases of appreciable temporal distance from the present. It is also possible to form complex demonstrative pronominals by taking the basic demonstrative to modify the generic noun peson ‘person’ or the pronominal numeral wan ‘one’. This gives dis/dat peson ‘this/that person’ and dis/dat wan ‘this/that one’. According to Todd (1979: 181), the genuine forms of the demonstrative pronouns are (39): (39) Singular diswan datwan

Plural ‘this’ ‘that’

diswan dem ‘these’ datwan dem ‘those’

234

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

Todd (1979) further reports that the pronouns dis and dat, found in the idiolect of educated speakers, occasionally replace the forms in (39). Today, the pure forms diswan and datwan for ‘this’ and ‘that’ respectively are completely obsolete. 3.6. Interrogative pronouns CPE reduces the use of interrogative pronouns to pro-adverbs. They are given in Table 6: Table 6. Interrogative pronouns Interrogative pronouns

Interrogative pro-adverbs

CPE

Gloss

Reference

CPE

Gloss

Reference

na hu

who

human

wu sai

where

(location)

(na) weti

what

non human

na wen

when

(time)

na wich

which

both human and non human

na wich taim

when

(time)

de taim weh

when

(narratives)

na hao

how

(manner)

wai

why

(reason)

na sika weti

why

(reason)

fo sika weti

why

(reason)

Most of the CPE interrogatives are made up of at least two morphemes. The morpheme na is compulsory in most of them but may be left out in weti and hu when the pronoun is placed at sentence initial position (43). Note that a specific feature of CPE interrogatives is that they can occupy at least two positions in the sentence. Thus, syntactically, some can be placed either in sentence initial or medial, and others can be placed either in sentence initial or final position. In each case, the third possibility is ruled out. In the instances where the interrogative is medially or finally located, the phrase at the initial position is fronted or moved for the purpose of focusing.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

235

3.6.1. Na hu: ‘who’ (40) a.

b.

na hu dong kari ma wata go wit am fo bafrum? who P1 carry my water go with it to bathroom ‘Who has carried my water to the bathroom?’ ma wata na hu dong kari am go fo bafrum? my water who P1 carry it go to bathroom ‘Who has carried my water to the bathroom?’

Thus, in (40b), the NP ma wata, is focused (the speaker is inquiring not about just any water but the one belonging to him), while in (41b), where the VP ´ı bi enta is being fronted, it gives the impression that the speaker is inquiring about the act of entering, whereas the focus is on the particular car s/he used to go to the market. 3.6.2. Na wich: ‘which’ (41) a.

b.

na wich moto i bi enta fo go maket? which car he P2 enter to go market ‘Which car did s/he take to the market?’ i bi enta na wich moto go fo maket? s/he P2 enter which car go to market ‘Which car did s/he take to the market?’

3.6.3. Na weti: ‘what’ (42) a.

na weti yu wan chop? ‘What do you want to eat?’ what you want eat

b.

yu wan chop na weti? ‘What do you want to eat?’ you want eat what

As said above, it is possible, with weti, to leave out the particle na, especially when the pronoun is fronted: (43) a.

weti bi what is

yua name? ‘What is your name?’ your name

But not in (b) and (c) below: b.

yua name na weti? ‘What is your name?’ your name what

c. yua name na weti, na? ‘What is your name?’ (Appealing!) your name what

236

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

3.6.4. Wu sai: ‘where’ (44) a. b.

wu sai yua mami de? ‘Where is your mother?’ where your mother is yua mami de wu sai? ‘Where is your mother?’ your mother is where

3.6.5. Na wich taim: ‘when’ (time) (45) a.

b.

na wich taim weh i mami di kam? when that his/her mother Prog come ‘When is his/her mother coming?’ i Mami di kam na wich taim? his mother Prog come when ‘When is his/her mother coming?’

Note that some speakers also produce the utterance without the particle na. Also, the phrase na wen, which can be placed at sentence initial or final position, was recorded from few speakers: 3.6.6. Na wen: ‘when’ (time) (46) a. b.

yu bi you past

kam na wen? come when

When did you come?

na wen yu bi kam? When did you come? when you past come

But the utterances were contested by another group of CPE users who think that na wen sounds like English and that the ‘real Pidgin’ is na woch taim or na wich taim. 3.6.7. De taim weh: ‘when’ (narrative) (47) a.

b.

de taim weh ren bi stat, dey when rain past start they ‘When the rain started, they ran.’

bi run. past run

dey bi run de taim weh ren bi stat. they past run when rain past start ‘When the rain started, they ran.’

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

237

3.6.8. Na hao: ‘how’ (48) a.

na hao yu waka ritch fo i skul? how you walk reach Prep his school ‘How did you walk to his school?’, ‘How did you reach his school?’ ‘How did you manage to go to his school?’

b.

yu waka ritch fo i skul na hao? you walk reach Prep his school how ‘How did you walk to his school?’, ‘How did you reach his school?’ ‘How did you manage to go to his school?’

3.6.9. Na sika weti or (na) fosika weti: ‘why’? (49) a.

b.

na sika weti weh wuna di krai? ‘Why are you crying?’ (na) fo sika weti why that you (pl) Prog cry kraı` sika weti?/ ‘Why are you crying?’ fo sika weti? Prog cry why

wuna di you

The interrogative ‘why’ can also be rendered by weti only (50a) or by fo weti when it is sent to sentence final position (50b): (50) a. weti yu de bit da pikin? ‘Why are you beating why you are beat that child that child?’ b.

yu de bit you are beat

da that

pikin fo weti? ‘Why are you beating child why that child?’

Note that some of the interrogatives can be translated with the stabiliser ‘it is’ inverted, when used as reaction to a statement, a situation or an event. For example, you can use na hu? to somebody knocking at your door, to mean ‘who is it?’, ‘who is there?’ In this case, the particle na plays the role of copula as indicated earlier. We can then have: (51) a. na hu? ‘Who is it?’ Cop who b. na weti? ‘What is it?’ Cop what c. na wen? ‘When is it?’ Cop when

238

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

The next pronouns discussed are the relative and the indefinite pronouns. What is common about them is that they both exercise a high degree of simplification, i.e. a pronoun single form functions as a synonym for more than one form in Standard English, as it is the case with the interrogative pronouns. 3.7. Relative pronouns As concerns the relative pronouns used in relative clauses, they are always immediately followed by a personal pronoun copy (which is identical to it in all the nominal features) if the noun it is related to, or substituted for, is animate (see 52 and 53). (52) a no sabi de peson weh i bi I Neg. know Det person RP 3Sg P2 ‘I don’t know who called.’

kol. call

Or a no sabi hu (weh) i I Neg. know who (CP) 3Sg ‘I don’t know who called.’

bi kol. P2 call

(53) Pat bi sabi se yi dong win Pat P2 know that she P1 win ‘Pat knew that she had won the match.’

de geim. Det match

(54) Jeri no sabi wich (wan) bi yi on. Jerry Neg. know which (RP) P2 his ‘Jerry doesn’t know which is his.’ The following examples (55) from Ayafor (2008: 435–6) prove that there is a merge of the relative pronouns who, whose, whom, which, and that. They are all expressed with the single relative weh in CPE. (55) a. A di tok fo Lum weh i di silip fo trenja rum. ‘who’ ‘I am talking to Lum who is sleeping in the guest room.’ b. Nji don si da kapinta weh yi wok tin dem don los. ‘Nji has seen the carpenter whose tools are missing.’

‘whose’

c. Na Massa Paul dat weh yu bi gif tu bak simen fo yi. ‘That is Mr. Paul to whom you gave two bags of cements.’

‘whom’

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

239

d. Wi don put ol pent weh yu bi bay am yeseday fo haus. ‘We have used all the paint which you bought yesterday on the house.

‘which’

e. Mike no go drin wata weh i komot fo wel. ‘Mike will not drink water that comes from the well.’

‘that’

We realise here that weh functions syntactically as na hu, na wi§, and dat. This property of syntactic simplification which is common in Pidgins is evident in CPE. Like Ayafor (2008), we also realised that weh is very multifunctional in CPE. Following Faraclas (1996: 187), we agree that it is better to refer to it as ‘relative clause introducer’ since it also functions as the Nigerian Pidgin relative pronoun we. Similarly, Eze (1980: 104–6) refers to it as a ‘subordination marker’ following its content, syntactic position and semantic interpretation in Nigerian Pidgin. CPE weh as the examples in (55) illustrate plays the same or similar roles. In CPE and Nigerian Pidgin, weh/we is invariable in syntactic position and is not marked for grammatical category such as number, class/gender, case, etc. This was already pointed out by Todd (1979) who calls we (or wei) ‘relative connective’: (56) di di di di

man wuman pikin bif

we we dem dem

a a we we

bin bin a a

lukam ‘The man whom I saw’ lukam ‘The woman I saw’ bin lukam ‘The children whom I saw’ bin lukam ‘The animals I saw’ Todd (1979: 181)

3.8. Indefinite pronouns Indefinite pronouns are used in the place of nouns, but do not say exactly which person or thing is meant. The examples in (57) show how indefinite pronouns are used in CPE. They include som ‘some’, plenti ‘many’, eni, ‘any’, enipeson/eniman ‘anyone’, enitin ‘anything’: (57) a. b.

som pikin dem bi kam (fo) si yu. ‘Some children some children pl. P2 come to see you came to see you.’ plenti pipo dem bi kol fo (sika) infometion. many people pl. P2 call Prep (because of ) information ‘Many people called for information.’

240

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

c. eni peson weh i wan si mi mek i kam tumoro. any person who he want to see me Sub him/ come tomorrow. her ‘Any person/anybody who wants to see me should come tomorrow.’ d.

eniman/ fi ple dat gem. ‘Anyone can play that game.’ enipeson anyone can play that game

e. enitin fi hapun. ‘Anything can happen’ anything can happen Nouns phrases headed by pronominal numeral wan ‘one’ can function as specific indefinite pronouns. These include anoda wan ‘another one’, som oda wan ‘some other one’ eni oda wan ‘any other one’ (58). (58) a. b.

a wan I want to

bai anoda wan. buy another one

‘I want to buy another one.’

gif mi som oda wan. ‘Give me some other one.’ give me some other one

c. i go teik eni oda wan. ‘He will take any other one.’ he Fut take any other one The nouns peson ‘person’, man ‘man’ function as special indefinite pronouns as illustrated in the following examples in (59): (59) a.

b.

peson no fi chop insai dis one neg can eat in this ‘One cannot even eat in this house.’

haus house

sef. even

man no fi chop insai dis haus sef. one neg can eat in this house even ‘One cannot even eat in this house.’

3.9. Reciprocal pronouns Reciprocal pronouns are formed by reduplicating11 the 1st, 2nd and 3rd person plural: wi-wi ‘we-we’, wuna-wuna ‘you-you’ (pl), dem-dem ‘them11. For more on the reduplication system of CPE, see Sala’s chapter in this volume.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

241

them’, all meaning ‘one another, each other, among ourselves’, ‘among yourselves’ and ‘among themselves’ respectively. However, it is not as productive in CPE as it is in Nigerian Pidgin (60), where it occurs both as subject and/or object (60). The sole example of use we recorded in CPE that brings out the idea of reciprocity is the sentence in (61). (60) wi-wi kom wund wi-wi. ‘We hurt one another/each other.’ 4EPR þR hurt 4EPR (Faraclas 1996: 106) (61) dem go they Fut

diskus dem-dem ‘They will discuss with one another/ discuss Rec amongst themeselves.’

However, just like in Nigerian Pidgin, the particle -sef preceded by the personal pronoun can be used in object position to express reciprocity: (62) wi we

laik like

dem laik they like

wisef / wasef. ourselves demsef. themselves

‘We like each other / one another.’

‘They like each other / one another.’

4. Conclusion So far we have given an account of the forms and functions of the several pronouns existing in CPE. It has been revealed that in most instances, the morphological forms of CPE pronouns are identical and it is only their syntactic positions that distinguish them as subject or object. In other instances, the use of specific su‰xes on the basic (personal pronoun) forms generates other pronoun types, e.g. -sef. In all, we have identified nine pronoun types: personal, possessive, reflexive, emphatic, interrogative, demonstrative, relative, indefinite and reciprocal. This English-based Creole is a language in which linguistic elements combine with pragmatic (context) ones to deliver meaning. CPE exhibits a relatively simple pronominal system that does not perturb communication, thereby allowing its users to interact comfortably. As a contribution to Creole studies in Cameroon, this study paves the way for more analyses on various other aspects of CPE grammar. The similarity of CPE with other Pidgins (e.g. Nigerian Pidgin) calls for thorough comparative studies which will reveal the place of ethnolinguistic similarities and di¤erences in the evolution of these two neighbouring varieties. Thus, pronouns are just one of the many pro-forms found in

242

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

CPE, and more is still left to be researched on them. Since researchers already seem to agree that CPE is a language on its own, it is, therefore, important that proper and thorough research investigations be carried out so that we understand the neuro-physiological processes involved in its acquisition and use.

Abbreviations þR 4EPR a AD Cop: CP Det: dp Fut: N P1: P2: pd pi Pl.: Prep: Prog: Rec RP: V Sg.: Subj:

Realis modality Emphatic pronoun reduplicated form Auxiliary Adverb Copula Complementizer Determiner Pronoun determiner Future marker Noun Immediate past tense marker Distant past tense Dependent pronoun Independent pronoun Plural Preposition Progressive (durative, continuous) Aspect marker Reciprocal Relative Pronoun Verb Singular Subject

References Alobwede, d’Epie C. 1998. Banning Pidgin English in Cameroon? English Today 14(1): 54–60. Ayafor, Miriam. 1996. An orthography for Kamtok. English Today 12(4): 53–57. Ayafor, Miriam. 2000. Kamtok: The ultimate unifying language for Cameroon. The Carrier Pidgin 28(1–3): 4–6.

Pronouns in Cameroon Pidgin English

243

Ayafor, Miriam. 2006. Kamtok (Pidgin) is gaining ground in Cameroon. In: Chia, Emmanuel (ed.), African Linguistics and the Development of African Communities. Dakar, Senegal: CODESRIA. 191–199. Ayafor, Miriam. 2008. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Morphology and syntax. In: Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.), pp. 428–450. Chumbow, Beban S. and Augustin Simo Bobda. 1995. The functions and status of English in Cameroon. Paper presented at the Conference, English in Africa, September 11–14, Grahamstown, South Africa. Chumbow, Beban S. and Augustin Simo Bobda. 1996. The life-cycle of post-imperial English in Cameroon. In: Fishman, Joshua A., Andrew W. Conrad and RubalLopez A. (eds.), Post-Imperial English: Status Change in Former British and American Colonies, 1940–1990. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 401–429. Eze, Smart N. 1980. Nigerian Pidgin Sentence Complexity. Vienna: Afro-Pub. Faraclas, Nicholas. 1996. Nigerian Pidgin. London: Routledge. Hansen, Klaus. 1993. Zum Englischen in Westafrika. Zeitschrift fu¨r Anglistik und Amerikanistik 41: 305–317. Koenig, Edna L. 1983. Sociolinguistic profile of the urban centers. In: Koenig, Edna et al. (eds.), pp. 33–53. Koenig, Edna L., Emmanuel Chia, and John Povey (eds.). 1983. A Sociolinguistic Profile of Urban Centers in Cameroon. Los Angeles: Crossroads Press. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2008. A Dictionary of Cameroon Pidgin English Usage: Pronunciation, Grammar and Vocabulary. Munich: LINCOM. Mackenzie, Lachlan J. 2002. Cameroon Pidgin English: A Grammatical Sketch. Available online at http://cursus.let.vu.nl/engels/kamtok.htm. Accessed 10 April 2003. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1983. The scope and role of Pidgin English in Cameroon. In: Koenig, Edna et al. (eds.), pp. 79–91. Mbangwana, Paul N. 2004. Pidgin English in Cameroon: A veritable linguistic menu. In: Echu, George and Samuel G. Obeng (eds.), Africa Meets Europe: Language Contact in West Africa. New York: Nova Science Publishers. 23–44. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon: A Study of Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Mbufong, Paul K. 2001. Pidgin English in Anglophone education. English Today 17(3): 52–54. Menang, Thaddeus. 2008. Cameroon Pidgin English (Kamtok): Phonology. In: Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.), pp. 133–149. Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.). 2008. Varieties of English, Volume 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Schneider, Gilbert D. 1966. West Africa Pidgin English: A Descriptive Linguistic Analysis with Texts from the Cameroon Area. Athens, Ohio: Hartford Seminary Foundation. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003a. Aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English. In: Lucko, Peter, Lother Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English. Berlin: Lang. 83–100.

244

Gratien G. Atindogbe´ and Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka

Schro¨der, Anne. 2003b. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Gunter Narr. Swann, Joan, Ana Deumert, Theresa Lillis and Rajend Mesthrie. 2004. A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press. Todd, Loreto. 1979. Some Day Been Dey: West African Pidgin Folktales. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Todd, Loreto. 1982a. Cameroon. (Varieties of English around the World. T1). Heidelberg: Groos. Todd, Loreto. 1982b. English in Cameroon: Education in a multilingual society. In: Pride, John B. (ed.), New Englishes. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 119– 137. Todd, Loreto. 1990. Pidgins and Creoles. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Todd, Loreto and Martin Jumbam. 1992. Kamtok: Anatomy of a Pidgin. English Today 8(1): 3–11.

Chapter 11 Gud Nyus fo Pidgin?: Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English Susanne Mu¨hleisen and Eric A. Anchimbe It would be ironic if the answer to Babel were pidgin and not Pentecost. (Steiner 1975: 470)

1. Bible translation in contact languages When George Steiner, in his classic study of language and translation After Babel (1975), wrote the above statement as the final and concluding sentence of his book, he referred to ‘‘pidgin’’ as a more general process of the increasing internationalisation and concurrent second language use of English, rather than to the development of specific contact languages with long traditions of first and distinct second language usages, relatively fixed structures and creative means of expansion. At the time of Steiner’s original publication of After Babel, hardly any of the numerous English-lexicon Pidgins and Creoles (P/C) around the world had been written languages beyond idiosyncratic practices in fictional texts. Almost 40 years later, most of them still are not the primary writing languages in their communities, and the written domain continues to be occupied by languages with a longer writing tradition as, for instance, English and French. However, as Steiner might note with some bewilderment more than 35 years after he made his statement, an increasing figure of Bible translations – usually the New Testament or a portion of it – can be found in Englishlexicon contact languages, most of which have been completed within the last 20 years. Therefore, there is now a complete Bible in Tok Pisin (Buk Baibel, 1989), as well as a substantial number of Gospels in Pidgin and Creole languages such as Krio (Gud Nyus F lman: Di Nyu Tstament, 1992), Hawaiian Pidgin (Da Jesus Book, 2000), Gullah (De Nyew Testament, 2005) – to cite just a few (cf. also Mu¨hleisen 2001, 2007). In Cameroon, the Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE) version of the Gospel, Gud Nyus fo ol Pipul: Nyu Testament fo Pidgin (henceforth Gud Nyus), was published in 2000. Before turning to the latter translation in more detail in section C

246

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

3, we will first of all outline some more general aspects of Bible translation into contact languages and traditions of writing in CPE. Religious texts are usually among the first larger written text types that emerge in previously uncodified languages. More often than not, such initiations to the written domain come into being through an act of translation. The outcomes of Bible translation are, therefore, not only religious, but also linguistic and cultural (cf. Mu¨hleisen 2005). 1.1. Codification, orthography and standardisation In the codification of a large and significant text like the Bible, a selection of linguistic variants, as well as a selection of script and orthography becomes particularly important. Because of the authoritative nature of the text, the choices made in the first Bible translation might then become a model for orthography rules for subsequent writing and can also lead to a de facto standardisation. Furthermore, the particular regional or social variety of language chosen for written communication is also likely to rise in status and become the high prestige form. 1.2. Lexical and syntactic elaboration and language enrichment Translation often goes along with the creation of new vocabulary items to express concepts and objects which are transferred from source language to target language. Lexical enrichment is, therefore, one part of language elaboration through translation (cf. also Gonzales 1992). Elaboration also involves the development of diverse syntactic possibilities, for instance, various hypotactic clauses and junctions, which are more typical for written than for oral communication. 1.3. From oral to written textual patterning The move from orality to literacy itself has further social and cultural consequences, for instance, with regard to the organisation of knowledge and society. After all, writing serves not only as a memory-supportive device or as a means to send a message across space and time, but also the written word, i.e. textualisation itself, becomes a social and cultural authority, an authority that is depersonalised and – in contrast to oral practices – not bound to specific individuals (cf. Ong 2002). 1.4. Building of a textual archive Written texts in translation such as Bible translations often serve as an important foundation for building a textual tradition in the new writing

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

247

language. Norms of di¤erent text types and genres are frequently transmitted through translation. All in all, one might say that the translation of larger and prestigious texts has the potential of raising the status of a variety as well as changing and enriching the lexical and syntactic possibilities of the language itself. It is, therefore, not surprising that linguists have been interested in various aspects of Bible translations into contact languages, and there are quite a number of studies on choice of orthography (e.g. Coomber 1992, DeSouza George 1992, Romaine 2005), or lexical and syntactic decisions (e.g. Mundhenk 1990) in English-lexicon P/C languages. For the Cameroonian context, Pidgin has been attested an increasing role in various domains which involve writing (cf. Schro¨der 2003, Neba et al. 2006). Following Schro¨der (2003: 181), the functions of CPE in Cameroon can be summarised as follows: Table 1. The functions of CPE (CamP) in Cameroon (Schro¨der 2003: 181, bold type added)

education mass media political campaign administration work religion trade literature and performing arts science and technology literary topics politics humor intimacy secret national and cultural identity

In general

Anglophones

Francophones

e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e e e e e

e e e e e very high, e e e e high, e e e medium, e e low, e very low frequency use

As seen in Table 1, while di¤ering with regard to the di¤erent population groups – in the Anglophone region, the significance of CPE is higher

248

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

in almost all domains – the overall importance of CPE as a lingua franca in Cameroon seems to be unquestioned. In the domain of religion, the function of CPE is rated as ‘‘very high’’ among ‘‘Anglophones’’ and ‘‘medium’’ in general. But also in other sectors in which writing is used – education, mass media, literature and performing arts, literary topics – Pidgin has at least some presence. In order to establish the significance of written texts in CPE and their history, the development of writing in Pidgin, and particularly the importance of religious texts, will be described.

2. Traditions of writing in Cameroon Pidgin English The first major writings in CPE were done by religious missionaries as early as 1926 (cf. Plissoneau 1926, Kerkvliet 1956, Todd 1974, 1979). Since the period before colonialism was marked by extensive missionary activities, it is understandable that the Catholic Church immediately benefited from the existence of CPE to spread its message. During BritishFrench colonialism in the 20th century, CPE continued to thrive (though o‰cially illegally during German colonialism 1884–1916) but faced growing competition from English, French and the indigenous languages. British colonisers were keen on education in indigenous languages besides English, the French insisted on education exclusively in French at all levels; hence the only safe abode for CPE was the church and the informal sector. The publications between 1926 and 1960 and even beyond attest to this: cf. Plissoneau (1926), Kerkvliet (1956, 1957), Socie´te´ Biblique (1966), Awa (1984), and Gud Nyus (2000). Today, some (Catholic) church catechisms are in CPE and some masses are conducted entirely in CPE. As the discussion in this chapter illustrates, the choice of writing system and the tradition of writing CPE is not yet a problem for its users or lexicographers for one major reason: there is no standard orthography yet. Orthographic variation is generally tolerated since writing is still considered a new ground in CPE. Table 2 shows orthographic and lexical variation in three CPE versions of The Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6: 9–13) compared with a Standard English version. The CPE versions are Plissoneaus’s Pidgin English Prayer Book, Rev. Ekoka A. Molindo’s online Cameroon Pidgin Bible, and Gud Nyus.

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

249

Table 2. Orthographic and lexical variation in The Lord’s Prayer in CPE English Bible

Plissoneau

Rev. Molindo

Gud Nyus

Our Father art hallowed come (Thy) will ground forgive deliver us temptation this day

Our Father live holy come commandia ground excuse move we bad road this day

We papa day (your name) big came power world excuse no make say bad thing today

We papa dei ono kam rul grong chus muv wi trai (eni ting trai we) tudei

Interestingly, it is the Gud Nyus published in 2000, apparently the most recent publication among the three CPE sources above, that moves away significantly from Standard English spelling. This newer text attempts to carve an orthographic territory for CPE through elaborations or innovations of not only its spellings but also lexis. This is in contrast to what happens to written CPE in literary texts as examples (1)–(4) below illustrate, where newer texts rather move towards English spellings. Besides religious texts, written CPE is also found in literary texts like novels, plays, short stories and poetry. Again, what matters, at least to readers and analysts (up to now), is the content of these texts rather than the form of the written language. From the literary standpoint, we could list sources like: Loreto Todd’s (1979) West African folktales (1) in CPE – which have English translations and are tailored towards research; John Menget’s unpublished collection of poems and plays, e.g. the play Mimbo Hos (lit. Bar) (2); Peter Wuteh Vakunta’s (2008) collection of poems, Mujanga Tok, (3); Bole Butake’s (1999) rampant use of CPE in his plays, and Nkemngong Nkengasong’s use of the language in his novels, e.g. The Widow’s Might (2006) (4). (1) I bin bi sohm dei nau sohm tu fulish got dem bin di waka. As dem di waka dem kam rish wantaim for sohm brij so. I tink wuna ohl sabi di ting we na brij? One day now there were two foolish goats out walking. As they were walking they arrived at the same time at a narrow bridge. I think you all know what a bridge is? (Todd 1979: 64 & 65)

250

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

(2) Munde: How you want sey make yi work? Yi work for bar den yi work for bed; work for santime, work for night. Two man work one man do’am. Mr. Bluemoon: Munde shut up dey! Who call you here? (John Menget, Mimbo Hos, Act 1, Scene 1) Munde: How do you expect her to work properly? She works in the bar and then also in bed. Work in the day and work in the night. Work meant for two people, but done by one person. Mr. Bluemoon: Munde, shut up there. Who asked you to intervene on this? (Our translation) (3) Die man no di fear bury grong. Man no die man no rotten. Man wey yi dei for grong, Yi no di fear for fall. Na so the palava yi dei! (Mimba We, Vakunta 2008: 3) A dead man is not afraid of the grave. If a person does not die, he can’t get rotten. He who is on the ground, Fears no fall. So is the issue! (Our translation) (4) . . . police and gendarme dem de control for take da so money for driver, book correct or e no correct. . .this country na chop I chop country waka. (Nkengasong 2006: 60) . . . policemen and gendarmes carry out controls only to take money from drivers irrespective of whether the documents are correct or not . . . this country is ‘you eat, I eat’ and the country goes ahead. (Our translation) From the four excerpts above, there is a progressive drift over time towards anglicised or standard English spelling of CPE. Although some of the words are pronounced di¤erently in CPE, the later authors still maintain the English spellings for them: e.g. ‘fear’ for CPE fia (3). Since CPE is revered as the language of daily interaction among all classes of people, it has also been used in written form to reach these. It has been used in social contexts, for example, in health communication especially HIV/AIDS sensitisation brochures, child care pamphlets, and other health related leaflets. These have been by both the government and private actors in the domain. Written CPE is also used in political texts. The most conspicuous of them, besides party slogans and adverts,

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

251

is the national electoral code that was translated into CPE before the 2004 presidential and parliamentary elections. Interestingly, the translation was neither ordered nor sponsored by the state. It was done by the NGO, Cameroon League for Human Rights, and was funded by the American Embassy in Cameroon. Again, like in Exs. 1–4, no reference is made to any writing standard used, and the general tendency is to use Englishbased spellings. The broad range of domains in which the use of written CPE is attested today shows the extent of its importance to the people. The irony in this is that the larger proportion of those who speak CPE are uneducated and hence unable to read. Most of these written documents, therefore, serve those who are literate and can read especially English, but who also have access to the same information in English (or also French). It is perhaps for this reason that there is, as of now, no controversy over patterns of writing CPE or competing traditions in its written form, even though writers have adopted di¤erent variants in spelling.

3. Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul 3.1. Orthographic choices One of the reasons why the choice of orthography plays a tremendous role in establishing English-related contact languages as writing languages lies in the social and linguistic relationship between the lexifier and the contact variety. The social relationship between the traditional writing language English and an English-lexified Pidgin like CPE is clearly one of considerable power di¤erences. But also the linguistic relationship, and especially the lexical vicinity between the two poses a challenge to the development of a successful orthography for the Pidgin: If the Pidgin orthography sticks with the conventions of English spelling, the di¤erences between English and Pidgin will appear haphazard and idiosyncratic, i.e. the new variety will lose its linguistic autonomy (Abstand, Kloss 1967). Romaine (2005: 105) summarises the predicament of developing orthographies for contact languages as follows: Creole writing systems based on the orthographies of their lexifiers often do creoles a disservice in suggesting that they are inferior and deficient versions of the languages to which they are lexically a‰liated. Non-standard orthographies are in e¤ect public representations of the nature and status of speakers and their relation to the standard and those who speak and write

252

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

it. They dramatize the power di¤erential between the standard and the usually socially devalued non-standard varieties. That is, one way of defining the relationship of non-standard to standard is to say that non-standard speakers are those whose speech variety does not have an orthography.

A strictly phonemic representation of the variety, as was proposed for writing Jamaican Creole by Frederic Cassidy (1993), would resolve the dilemma in that, rather than ‘‘suggesting that they are inferior and deficient versions of the languages to which they are lexically a‰liated’’ (Romaine 2005: 105), the phonemic orthography visibly shows and even furthers the distance between lexifier and contact variety. A consistent spelling system with autonomous rules would also no doubt increase the status of the variety immensely. Most linguists who have written on P/C orthographies (e.g. Hellinger 1986, Winer 1990, Romaine 2005), therefore, agree that a phonemic version would be the desirable one. However, there are a number of problems – linguistic, ideological and practical ones – connected with this seemingly ideal solution, which might be summarised as follows: a) A phonemic orthography obscures morpho-phonemic relations, for instance, in the phonemic representation of allomorphic plural ‘s’ forms as /s/, /z/ or /iz/. Moreover, morpho-phonemic and etymological relations between words like sign and signature would be lost in a phonemic version. b) The fact that the phonemic orthography has to be learnt anew tends to put o¤ those readers who are already literate in English. This is not a purely practical issue, i.e. the fact that it requires some e¤ort, but also an ideological one: people very often associate writing with one possible ‘‘correct’’ version only and do not readily accept that a word like university might also be spelled like yuunivorsiti. Reading beginners usually do not have the same practical and ideological problems with phonemic spelling as established readers do. c) By standardising a Pidgin or Creole, some writers feel bereaved of the flexibility and spontaneity to use the language in their own idiosyncratic fashion. This might be seen as losing the creative potential of the variety or, indeed, the subversive potential of the variety as ‘‘antilanguage’’ and ‘‘anti-standard’’ (cf. Romaine 2005: 126–34). It is especially due to considerations of reader acceptability, outlined in b), that most P/C Bible translations have opted for a mixture between phonemic spelling and adherence to conventions of English orthography. One marked exception is the Krio translation (Gud Nyus F lman. Di Nyu C

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

253

Tstament) of 1992, which made use of two phonetic symbols from the IPA, ‘’ and ‘’, for the representation of two vowels. But, more importantly than representing the sound ‘‘accurately’’, the inclusion of two symbols that are not part of the English orthography has a distancing e¤ect to the lexifier language. The language political motive for this becomes evident in the following quote: In Sierra Leone, users have been combating the systems of inherited symbols while trying to introduce indigenous phonetic symbols against the background of the considerable influence exerted by our inherited European language. Specifically for Krio, these problems are made all the more enormous because of ingrained attitudes to the language, which are primarily the result of historical stigma and prejudices built up as a consequence of the social a‰liation of the Creoles during the colonial era, particularly in the realms of administration and politics. (De-Souza George 1992: 49)

In Cameroon, the form of orthography for writing in CPE varies considerably. There is, on the one hand, a tradition of spelling that is very close to Standard English orthography and on the other a predominantly phonemic spelling. The early writings of CPE adopted the Standard English based spellings as can be seen in the following examples (5)–(8). They are taken from works written between 1926 and 1956. However, certain other works written after this period also use Standard English spelling. Monsignor Plissoneau’s Catholic Catechism, Cate´chisme, published in 1926 (5)–(6) is one of the first documents that used written CPE for widespread functions, i.e., in the local churches. (5) 1. 2.

Who he ben make heaven and ground? – God he ben make heaven and ground. Who he be God? – God he be big King for all things. He dash good men, and he punish bad men. (Plissoneau 1926)

(6) Who’s side we get the big true things whe the church i teach we? – we get the big true things whe the church i teach we, for ‘‘Apostles believe’’. (Plissoneau 1926, as quoted in Todd and Jumbam 1992: 4) Interestingly, some of the grammatical features that have not been testified in most P/C languages are used in the above passage. This is the case of the possessive marker (’s) in (6) who’s. Again, plural is marked on the noun men in (5), good men . . . bad men, whereas in most P/C this is done using a post-nominal element as in present-day CPE, as in (11) below:

254

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

Judean kontri pipul dem. Plissoneau also used i (6) for the post-nominal singular marker represented in more recent writings including Gud Nyus as e. Thirty years after Plissoneau’s (1926) Cate´chisme, the spelling tradition remained the same. In the next example (7) from Kerkvliet’s (1956) The Sunday Gospels and Epistles with Short Explanations in Pidgin English, Standard English spelling is still preferred. One thing stands out though, the use of the progressive marker de, which is not used in (6) whereas it could have been preferred in the sequence: things whe the church i [de] teach we. This is because the teachings of the church will continue. We could also mention the retention of the i singular marker identified above. (7) For inside Gospel we learn again – how Jesus He be God for true, – Cathechism i de talk say – God savvy all thing. (Kerkvliet 1956: 52) Still serving the Catholic Church, the next excerpt was produced much later, in 1984 but it still carries many of the orthographic features identified above. Awa’s (1984) Sunday Lectionary in Pidgin English, however, introduces the post-verbal object particle –am; nail-am, and the second person plural pronoun una. Both features are used in the Gud Nyus, albeit with a slight orthographic modification in una which becomes wuna. (8) For Pentecost Day, Peter and the eleven (apostle) them been stand for up and with strong voice them talk for the people say, ‘Make all people for Israel them savy for true say: God he done make this Jesus whe una been nail’am for cross for be Master and Christ’. (Awa 1984: 200, as quoted in Schro¨der 2003: 99) The phonemic spelling approach in CPE started around 1966 when the Socie´te´ Biblique (Bible Society) translated the Gospel according to St. Mark into CPE, based, as Todd and Jumbam (1992: 6) say, on ‘‘the usage of older Bamenda speakers’’. In this translation (9), new facets of CPE are revealed, i.e., there is more elaboration of the code. For instance, there are reduplications, bik bik ticha, post-nominal possessive marker Jews dem klak (clerk), etc. (9) Den yi bi begin fo tich dem sey di Pikin fo Man go sofa plenty ting, an di bik bik pipu, weti di bik bik ticha, an di Jews dem klak go dinai yi, an dem go kil yi, den apta tri dey yi go komot fo dai. Todd’s (1979) Some Day been Dey brought a new dimension to the spelling of CPE. This, she believes, was to solve a problem caused by the phonemic orthography used in the 1966 translation, which Todd and

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

255

Jumbam (1992: 6) capture thus: ‘‘literate Cameroonians found it hard to read, partly because it did not use a spelling system which overlapped that of English or French’’. The proposals (10) she made have hardly been used in later texts. (10) Sohm dei bin de nau, mboma bin waka i wan foh bush. I bin hohnggri bad an i bin di luk fo hia an fo de. I bin di luk fo sohmting fo chohp. Den i si sohm smohl got. I waka sohfri sohfri I rich i. den I shut I hed kwik I kach got fo I fut. (Todd 1979: 68) The letter ‘h’ is added to vowel symbols like ‘o’ or ‘e’ to indicate vowel length, e.g. sohm (some), chohp (chop), agehn (again) or ehniwei (anyway) (cf. Todd 1979: 54). The motivation for the occasional introduction of double consonant symbols, like in hohnggri (hungry), is not very clear. The Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul translation (2000) on which this chapter is based, uses phonemic spelling but with significant di¤erences to Todd’s (1979) version above. The following passage (11) roughly corresponds to (8) above. The orthographic di¤erences to Todd’s text are very glaring: (11) Peter yi tok (Akshon 2.14) Peter e tanap fo op witi de oda eleven apostul dem an e tok trong fo de pipul dem sei, ‘‘Ma Judean kontri pipul dem an ol wuna weh wuna di stei fo Jerusalem, meik wuna lisen fo ma tok meik A tel wuna weiti weh dis ting e min.’’ But even before the first publication of the CPE Gospel, idiosyncratic spelling versions that signalled a greater distance to English than the Sunday Lectionary in Pidgin English could be found, for instance, in newspaper columns (12): (12) Pipo way dem di wok for deh, make dem lookut, bicos when dat bomb go be released or explode, yi look like yi go catch plenty big or top ranking pipo. (Cameroon Tribune, June 23, 1999, as quoted in Schro¨der 2003: 99) Four years before the translation of the New Testament into CPE was published, Ayafor (1996) had proposed a spelling system for CPE. Her aim is not only to give Kamtok, as she calls it, a standard orthography but also to buy it away from the conception that it is bad English. This is because, [b]eing spelt mostly in English, it gives the impression that Kamtok is simply bad English. But this is not the case. Kamtok is a new language that needs to have its own spelling system. (Ayafor 1996: 56)

256

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

She proposes the use of the Roman alphabet script, i.e., the alphabet on which the Standard English spelling system is based, but with diacritics and the marking of tones. For instance, without specifying contexts, she proposes that ‘yes’ be written in CPE as ye`s, ‘question’ as kwe´shoˆn, chop as tsoˆp, just as jos, and ‘rich’ as rits. She also proposes the use of diphthongs like ‘oi’ in nois (noise), ‘oy’ in boy (boy), ‘au’ in haus (house), ‘aw’ in haw (how), and ‘ay’ in hay (high). Most CPE texts published after Ayafor’s (1996) proposal do not reflect her suggestions. The use of tone marks is certainly new and even more confusing. This might be one of the reasons why this proposal has not been used. Again, it is like putting the clock back on the phonemic orthography that has been in use since 1966. Her proposal, however implicitly, contradicts the claim she puts forward that ‘‘Kamtok is a new language’’. If it actually is, why not propose orthographic strategies which mark it more clearly as an autonomous variety such as, for instance, by means of phonemic spelling or even introduction of additional symbols (cf. Krio)? This somehow throws us back to the debate on the autonomy of P/C writing systems mentioned in the early part of this chapter. In 2009, Sala (2009) returned to the orthography question in CPE. The orthography he proposes is also English-based, and uses tone marks, as he implies, on homographs and other words whose meanings are di¤erentiated only by vocalic variation in pronunciation or tones, e.g. bı`g mo´p (big mouth: pride) as opposed to bı´g mo`p (big mouth), wa`ta´ (water) vs. wata (verb ‘to water’ e.g. plants), and broda (brother) vs. bro´da` (respect title for older male). However, it is not clear why other words which do not have the above qualities should be written with tone marks as well, for instance, mo`nı´ (money) and je´lo`sı´ ( jealousy). Like Ayafor (1996) he concludes, though ambiguously, that ‘‘a writing system for CPE should follow the English orthography as much as we lose nothing, and deviate from it as much as we gain something’’ (Sala 2009: 15).1 In actual practice, the choices made in the Gud Nyus are as follows. Overall, the phonemic system introduced in 1966 is used, though with several new spellings and other elaborations. As we shall see below, even the most faithful attempts at achieving a close correspondence between 1. On one of Cameroon’s state-owned university campuses, Buea campus in the anglophone South West Region, there are warning signs which are supposed to discourage students from using pidgin. One of them reads ‘‘If you speak pidgin you will write pidgin!’’ From our discussion above, we might conclude that this sounds almost like wishful thinking – if only it were that simple!

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

257

graph and sound in the new system are corrupted by possible confusions with homographs in English orthography: 3.1.1. Vowel-graph correspondence – As an example of an attempt at a close vowel-graph correspondence, /i/ is realised as ‘i’ in most words, for instance, in mi, ting, yi, bin, bigin, pipul, etc. However, very prominently, the post-nominal singular marker /i/ is represented by e – derived from English third person singular pronoun he – probably because a single i would be too similar to the English first person singular I which, in CPE is realised as A. (13) Den Pilate e teik Jesus dem bit-am an de soldja dem meik some chuku-chuku kap dem put-am fo Jesus yi hed. (John 19: 1) (14) Jesus e tok fo Pilate sei, ‘‘Yu get pawa fo ontop mi foseika sei yi weh e dei op heven e don giv-am fo yu. So man weh e bin giv mi fo yua han e don du na ting weh e bad pas mak.’’ (John 19: 11) – Double vowel signs, i.e. ‘uu’ to distinguish the words tu and tuu (as in English to and too), and ‘ii’ to distinguish ship and shiip (see English ship and sheep) (15) (p. 176, p. 195), but not to mark vowel length within Pidgin. Thus, for instance, in fri and di the vowels are represented equally even though, in spoken Pidgin, the first vowel would be slightly longer. (15) Fo insaid God-haus Jesus e si pipul dem weh dem di sel kau dem, shiip them an faul dem. (John 2: 14) However, the use of double vowel signs in the word sliip (p. 111) (for English sleep) is not immediately clear. It is not to distinguish it from slip (English slip) because this is not attested in the Gud Nyus and it is not a marker of length either because similar words like keep and meet take single vowel signs: kip and mit. The word meet is a bit di¤erent because it occurs in CPE as mitop, being originally a combination of meet and up. – Use of ‘h’ in weh in order to avoid confusion with first person plural pronoun we in English – even though it is represented in the Gud Nyus as wi. Here, ‘e’ is, therefore, a short vowel, and ‘h’ addition does not represent length. It is also perhaps to di¤erentiate it from earlier CPE writings which spelled it as whe (6) or wey or wee. – Diphthongs: several representations of diphthongs are used in the CPE spelling of the Gud Nyus: ‘ei’ (meik), ‘ai’ (laik) ‘au’ (autside). However,

258

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

monophthongs are preferred in certain words where diphthongs could as well occur: e.g. pawa not *pauwa (power), tam not *taim (time), and Pilate, not *Pailat (all names seem to be transferred from the English spelling form unchanged). From the spoken CPE itself, the sounds in meik, teik, or dei are not really diphthongs. They are monophthongs, though slightly longer – in which case a spelling like mek, tek, or de might be more appropriate. Most previous writings preferred English spellings for ‘make’, ‘take’ and ‘day’. 3.1.2. Consonant-graph correspondence – ‘k’ for ‘c’: As a first and pretty consistent consonant-graph correspondence is the use of ‘k’ in places where English uses ‘c’, ‘ch’ in writing which correspond to /k/ in speech. Exceptions are Biblical names (Corinthian, Colossian), people’s names (Christ), and names of places (Cana, Capernaum) where English forms are maintained. Common examples are ko’ (call), kona (corner), kagu (cargo), kam (come), klus (clothes), kuk (cook), kova (cover), and kari (carry). – ‘w’ for ‘wh’: in most wh-words, Gud Nyus deletes ‘h’ after ‘w’ as in wich (which) (p. 159) and wai (why) (p. 72). But in the case of ‘who’, ‘w’ is instead deleted: hu (who) (p. 71). This means that it is those consonants which are not pronounced that are not written. The other question words follow the ‘h’-deletion pattern but have been restructured over time, e.g. wusaid for where (from which þ side). – ‘d’ for ‘th’: before ‘e’ and ‘a’, especially at the beginning of words: daa (that), den (then), dem (them), de (the), but also in word-medial positions as in oda (other), broda (brother) (p. 43). So, the voiced interdental fricative [¶] is represented in the Gud Nyus by ‘d’ and the voiceless [] by ‘t’ as in (16) and (17). (16) Den ol pipul fo daa taun dem komot fo go mitop Jesus. (Matthew 8: 34) – ‘t’ for ‘th’: before ‘i’ and ‘a’, as in ting (thing), tink (think), noting (nothing), tank (thank) as in (17). (17) Jesus e tok fo yi sei, ‘‘Mami, yu tink sei na yu fit tel mi ting weh A go do? Ma tam e nova korekt.’’ (John 2:4) – ‘j’ for [d‰]: the voiced palate-alveolar a¤ricate [d‰] is mostly presented as the letter ‘j’. For example, joj ( judge), treinja (stranger), vileij (village), maneij (manage) and anjel (angel). This choice is certainly moti-

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

259

vated by the phonetic resemblance with the behaviour of the letter ‘j’, pronounced [d‰], in other words like ‘joy’, ‘enjoy’, or ‘jump’. – ‘ch’ for [t§ ]: the voiceless palate-alveolar a¤ricate [t§ ] is rather represented by the orthographic segment ‘ch’ as in English spelling. For example, cheinj (change), toch (touch), ticha (teacher), chop (chop), chakara (scatter), chif (chief ) and cheik (check). – ‘kw’ for ‘qu’: the orthographic combination ‘qu’ is written as ‘kw’ as in the words, kwayet (quiet) (p. 43), kwik (quick) (p. 53). – Insertion of a linking ‘r’ in final positions for liaison: final consonant deletion is common in this translation but the deleted consonant graph, especially ‘r’ (hia, fia – hear, fear), is reinserted when the postverbal object particle ‘am’ is attached to the verb as in example (18) below: (18) Fo tam weh Ananias e hiar-am so, e fol dong wan tam an e dai. (Akshon 5: 5) Neba et al. (2006: 57) cite the translation of the New Testament into CPE as one among other examples which ‘‘serve as the necessary background to an e¤ective standardisation of CPE.’’ They see the issue of standardisation as a more or less technical one: The major work to be done in this regard is to synchronise all these works and propose one unified standard for the language, and then to propose a lexicon for it. Once this has been done, the aforementioned problems [of standardisation] can be solved. Indeed, such problems are not unique to CPE, and they do not constitute a reason to banish it. (Neba et al. 2006: 57)

It would indeed be good news for Pidgin if an easy solution could be found for the development of a standard orthography. However, given the ideological and practical obstacles outlined above and the limited success with standardising other English-lexicon contact languages; one might be wary of all too fast and simple accomplishments in this area. 3.2. Lexis and syntax Lexical innovation and vocabulary enrichment are a regular consequence of language contact, including translation. After all, in any translation, the target language has to deal with new concepts carried over from the source language. There are a number of strategies the translator can select in order to render the source language concept/word in the translation. In their classic ‘‘methodology for translation’’, Vinay and Darbelnet (1958/

260

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

2004) outline seven possible procedures – borrowing, calque, literal translation, transposition, modulation, equivalence and adaptation – ranging from closest vicinity (borrowing) to maximum distance (adaptation) to the source. Too many borrowings from the source text – which in the case of Bible translations into English-lexicon contact languages means mostly established English Bible translations and not the Hebrew and Greek original – pose a problem for a Pidgin like CPE in that this strategy might lead to a considerable loss of autonomy and identity and a greater approximation to its lexifier, English. For the same reason, calques or loan translations between English and CPE are also not very fruitful as a strategy. Calques are involved, however, in that translations in this context also engage underlying indigenous languages. Conceptual translations (19) and loan translations (20) from the indigenous cultural background and languages can be observed in CPE expressions like hongri wata – ‘hungry water’: v-to be thirsty, n-thirst (19), or hai skin – ‘high skin’: pride, proud (20) below. (19) bot eni man weh e drink de wata weh A di giv-am, e no fit di hongri wata agein. but any man who he drinks the water that I am giving, he will not be thirsty again. but whoever drinks of the water I shall give him will never thirst. (John 4: 14) (20) E fain fo pipul weh dem no di hai skin. It is fine for people who do not high skin Blessed are the meek. (Matthew 5: 5) Example (20) is interesting in that, here, a positive statement is translated using a negative one. In the English version the attribute meek is used but in the CPE translation a negative phrase is preferred no di hai skin: not proud, not haughty. It is perhaps an attempt to capture what is easily identifiable in the community as sin rather than insisting on virtue. All the other beatitudes in Matthew 5: 3–10 are in the positive. It is clear, however, some of these expressions, e.g. hungri wata, bad-hat, and badfashon, are not exclusively triggered by the Bible translation but are part of the general stock of vocabulary of CPE, but others, e.g. hai skin, fain-hat, and treinja kontri are. In CPE, the expression hai up is more commonly used and accepted than hai skin while fain-hat is created here in analogy to bad-hat which exists in CPE.

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

261

Questions of cultural equivalence and transfer are also at stake when we look at cases where ‘‘the same situation [is] rendered by two texts using completely di¤erent stylistic and structural methods’’ – a procedure which Vinay and Darbelnet (2004: 134) have labelled ‘equivalence’. Phraseological units like proverbs and idioms, but also relatively fixed nominal or adjectival phrases, are usually subject to this strategy in translation. In the following examples, CPE blu hon (‘blow horn’: blow trumpet or sound a trumpet; boast, brag, show o¤, (21) replaces the English ‘sounding of the trumpet’, the bak-doh miting (‘back-door meeting’: secret meeting, (22) is used as equivalent to the secret calling of the wisemen in the English version and taking the chair (chop chia ‘take chair’: v-succeed, n-heir, successor, (23, 24) leads to succession in CPE: (21) Meik yu no bigin di blu hon sei meik pipul dem see yu hau weh yu di giv fo puo pipul. Make you not begin to blow horn to make people see you how you give to poor people. Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you. (Matthew 6: 2) (22) Den Herod e kol daa pipul fo lan staa, fo some bak-doh miting. Then Herod he call those people who learn stars to a back door meeting Then Herod secretly called the wisemen. (Matthew 2: 7) (23) Archelaus e don chop yi papa yi chia. Archelaus he had eaten his father’s chair Archelaus was reigning over Judea instead of his father. (Matthew 2: 22) (24) Dis wan na chop-chia fo masa, wuna kam meik wi kil-am wi chop yi kagu. This one is successor of the master, you come make us kill him and eat his cargo This is the heir, let us kill him and have his inheritance. (Matthew 21: 38) A final example of a stylistic and structural transfer can be found in the CPE expression muv-am fo yaa put-am fo dei which is used to render ‘argument, engaged conversation or exchange’ (25): (25) Den Jesus e ask dem sei, ‘‘Na weti wuna so so di tok fo roud so, di muv-am fo yaa put-am fo dei?’’

262

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

Then Jesus he asked them saying, ‘‘What is it you talking about over and over on the road, removing it from here and putting it there?’’ And he said to them, ‘‘What is this conversation which you are holding with each other as you walk?’’ (Luke 24: 17) 3.3. Cultural and social concepts In Bible translation, ‘‘cultural equivalence’’ (Nida 1964) is often achieved by a transfer of concepts which refer to specific localities or groups of people. This strategy of bringing the text to the reader is used to ensure that the reader can fully identify with the text. In the CPE Gospel translation, we can, therefore, find examples where wilderness – in the Judean context probably a desert-like landscape – becomes bush – ‘forest, jungle’ (26). Furthermore, the rather unspecific terms treinja kontri – ‘foreign country’ (27) and preiya haus – ‘prayer house’ (28) respectively stand for the religious references Gentiles as a specific group of people (‘non-believers, non-Jews’) and Synagogue in the translated text: (26) John de Baptist komot go fo bush fo Judea. John the Baptist left went to the bush of Judea John the Baptist [preaching] in the wilderness of Judea (Matthew 3: 1) Even though bush is an e¤ective choice here, it is also used in other contexts and has di¤erent meanings in CPE which may interfere with the Biblical message. For instance, in CPE, bush also refers to farm, especially one that is far away from home. It would be completely misleading if (26) was understood as John the Baptist went to the farm of Judea. From this notion of bush as farm, new concepts and lexical expressions have emerged not only in CPE but also in Cameroon English, especially, bushfaller or bushfalling or to fall bush which, contrary to the Gud Nyus meaning above, meaning respectively, someone who lives abroad (mostly in Europe or USA), the act of emigrating abroad, and the verb to emigrate to Europe and USA (especially for economic reasons). So, the use of bush for wilderness adds a new meaning to the word, albeit with a meaning that contrasts that of ‘bush’ as a source of food and subsistence. (27) wuna sabi sei de pipul weh dem di rul treinja kontri dem na big pipul. you know that the people who rule stranger countries are big people You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. (Matthew 20: 25)

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

263

(28) E bin di tich fo insaid preiya haus dem an ol pipul dem bi di preis yi. He was teaching inside prayer houses and all people were praising him. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. (Luke 4: 15) The translation makes a distinction between ‘temple’, which it refers to many times as God-haus but also as tempul, and synagogue translated as preiya haus. This distinction engenders new compound creations like God-haus-tax (p. 37) for ‘temple tax’ (Matthew 17: 24) that help expand the lexicon of the language. Certain abstract concepts on the social behaviour of people are adapted and used for concepts raised in the Bible. This further brings the translated Bible closer to its target readers. The following compound expressions have been used: bad fashon (bad fashion: inequity, lawlessness, (29), badhat (bad heart: to hate, hatred, wickedness, (30), fain-hat (fine heart: kindness, goodness, (31), and lok-moup mak (lock mouth mark: miracle, sign, (32). (29) bot fo insaid wuna fulop witi lai-lai an bad fashon. but inside you is filled with lie lie and bad fashion. but within you are full of hypocrisy and inequity. (Matthew 23: 28) The meaning of bad fashon in CPE generally is ‘bad behaviour’, i.e., it is used on someone who is disrespectful, wicked, and self-centred. (30) Ol pipul dem go bad-hat wuna foseika ma neim. All people will bad heart you because of my name. And you will be hated, by all for my name’s sake. (Matthew 10: 22) The compound bad-hat is used in three parts of speech: v-to hate, n-hatred, and adj-wicked. Its adjectival usage rather translates as ‘wicked people’ rather than as ‘hatred people’. This shows that a clear one-to-one correspondence between concepts in English and CPE is di‰cult to find. Meanings easily overlap. Fain-hat (fine heart) is created in the Gud Nyus in analogy to, and as an opposite of, bad-hat. (31) De kontri pipul dem fo daa pleis dem bin sho wi plenti fain-hat. The country people of those places showed us plenty fine heart. And the natives showed us unusual kindness. (Acts 28: 2) Actions or happenings that are wonderful, extraordinary are described as lok-moup (32). Literally, they leave us speechless, hence ‘lock mouth’. The miracles and signs Jesus performed left many speechless.

264

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

(32) dem bin si de lok-moup mak dem weh yi e bin sho-am. they saw the lock mouth marks that he showed. they saw the signs which he did. (John 2: 23) Nida’s (1964) notion of ‘‘cultural equivalence’’ in translation mentioned above is similar to the notion of indigenisation or nativisation in the study of New Englishes or to the method of translation known as ‘‘domestication’’ (as opposed to ‘‘foreignisation’’) in the work of Schleiermacher (1813/2004). The Gud Nyus adopts several domestication strategies that cast the Bible and the gospel within a Cameroonian linguistic and sociocultural background. The expressions doh blain (door blind: curtain), treikona (three corner: roundabout, thoroughfare), kerosin (kerosene: oil used in lamps), bush (bush: wilderness, (26), and kotlas (cutlass: sword) have been attested in both Cameroon English and CPE, and are used here to keep the Cameroonian audience close to the translation. The following examples illustrate these domesticated usages: (33) De doh blain weh e bin di hang fo de doh fo God-haus e bin tia fo tu haf. The door blind that it was hanging at the door to the temple it tore into two halves. and the curtain of the temple was torn in two. (Luke 23: 45) Door blinds in Cameroon are generally used in private homes and hardly in churches. But because the New Testament refers to a curtain that functions as a door blind, the expression is immediately used in this context. Even though, some translations of the Bible say that the curtain was in the sanctuary of the temple, Gud Nyus rather conceptualises this as the curtain at the door, hence doh blain. (34) Wuna go fo trei-kona dem an wuna kol eni man meik e kam. You go to three corners and you call any man make he comes. Go therefore to the thoroughfares, and invite to the marriage feast as many as you find. (Matthew 22: 9) The notion of trei-kona (34) in this example is highly indigenised. It is not directly linked to a highway or thoroughfare or roundabout as such. It simply means a place where many people can be found, and this could be where many roads meet. Such places will normally include markets, squares, and bars.

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

265

(35) De fulish wan dem bi teik lam dem, bot dem no teik kerosin fo kona. The foolish ones took lamps but they did not take [additional ] kerosene for corner. For when the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them. (Matthew 25: 3) The choice of kerosin over oil in (35) is perhaps because in Cameroon, kerosene rather than oil is used in lamps. Maintaining ‘oil’ in this context would have led to confusion since what is generally known in Cameroon as ‘oil’ is the liquid used for cooking. (36) Dem go kil som witi kotlas an dem go kach oda wan put-am fo prison dem fo treinja kontri. They will kill some with cutlass and they will catch other ones put in prison in stranger [ foreign] countries. They will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led captive among all nations. (Luke 21: 24) The cutlass is more known to CPE speakers than the sword. The correspondence between the two is a bit shaky (but e¤ective) because whereas the sword is predominantly a weapon, the cutlass is mostly used as a farming tool. It has also been used in inter-tribal conflicts as a weapon. To the above examples on indigenisation, we could add the word bush (26) used to translate wilderness. As many of the examples above show, the method of domestication has been applied in the translation of Gud Nyus in order to move the ‘‘text to the reader’’ (Schleiermacher 1813/2004: 49), i.e., to make the text a smoother read for the intended audience. This is a common strategy in Bible translation where, after all, the message or the word of God has to be brought to the believer. What is lost with this strategy, however, is the opportunity of bringing new concepts into the language through translation.

4. E¤ects of Bible translation in Cameroon Pidgin English In the meantime, however, the e¤ect of Bible translations in CPE as an authoritative text that can serve as a model for other writings is challenged: recently, many Bible translations in contact languages (and others) have been spread in new audio and audiovisual forms. The ‘‘Jesus Film

266

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

Project’’ (www.jesusfilm.org), for example, distributes a two-hour docudrama about the life of Christ, ‘‘Jesus’’, in 1,058 languages, among them also Nigerian Pidgin English and CPE. Similarly, an audio-version of the Gospel can easily be made available by downloading the respective language version from the website of ‘‘Faith comes by hearing’’ (www.fcbh.org). While such new means of distributing the message are certainly good news for the missionary goal, the question is whether they are also good for the linguistic aim of strengthening the languages and raising their status. Their linguistic impact can only be judged in the extent to which they may influence the verbal rendition of the language since these two projects are audio-visual and not written as the Gud Nyus studied in this chapter is. The CPE version on www.fcbh.org is a reading of the Gud Nyus. As far as we know, the Gud Nyus is the latest complete translation of the New Testament into CPE. Its choice of phonemic spelling has still not yet been either extensively adhered to or challenged. In research circles, a few references have been made to it, e.g. Neba et al. (2006: 57) quoted above, and Sala (2009: 12) who says: ‘‘The Gud Nyus fo ol Pipul. . . the Bible translated by the Cameroon Bible Society, provides a writing system that looks like transcription. The title itself speaks for itself ’’. As mentioned earlier, writers of CPE do not yet take into account strategies used by others to write the language. The choices in writing have rather attracted researchers’ attention than users’ or writers’ of the language. Again, the evolution of CPE writing has taken opposing directions in Bible translations and literary creations. And there seems to be no contact between writers in these two fields. Whereas Bible translations have consistently moved away from Standard English spellings in preference for phonemic spellings, literary publications have significantly recreated Standard English spellings (see Vakunta 2008 and Appendix 2). References Ayafor, Miriam. 1996. An orthography for Kamtok. English Today 12(4): 53–57. Awa, Pius. 1984. Sunday Lectionary in Pidgin English: Complete Pidgin English Lectionary for Sundays and Major Feastdays throughout the Year. Rome: Vatican Polyglot Press. Buk Baibel. 1989. Port Moresby: Baibel Sosaiti bilong Papua Niugini. Butake, Bole. 1999. Lake God and other Plays. Yaounde: Editions CLE. Cassidy, Frederic G. 1993. A short note on creole orthography. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 8: 135–137.

Bible translation as language elaboration in Cameroon Pidgin English

267

Coomber, Ajayi. 1992. The new Krio orthography and some unresolved problems. In: Jones, Eldred et al. (eds.), pp. 15–20. Da Jesus Book: Hawaii Pidgin New Testament. 2000. Hawaii: Wycli¤e Bible Translators. De Nyew Testament. 2005. New York: American Bible Society. De-Souza George, Raymond E. 1992. Problems relating to reading from a script (with special reference to broadcasters, actors and other readers). In: Jones, Eldred et al. (eds.), pp. 49–53. Gonzales, Andrew. 1992. Reconceptualization, translation and the intellectualization of a Third World language: The case of Filipino. In: Bolton, Kingsley and Helen Kwok (eds.), Sociolinguistics Today: International Perspectives. London: Routledge. 300–322. Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul: Nyu Testament fo Pidgin. 2000. Yaounde: Bible Society of Cameroon. Gud Nyus F lman: Di Nyu Tstament. 1992. Freetown: Bible Society in Sierra Leone. Hellinger, Marlis. 1986. On writing English-related Creoles in the Caribbean. In: Go¨rlach, Manfred and John Holm (eds.), Focus on the Caribbean. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 53–70. Jones, Eldred D., Karl I. Sandred and Neville Shrimpton (eds.). 1992. Reading and Writing in Krio: Proceedings of a Workshop Held at the Institute of Public Administration and Management, University of Sierra Leone, Freetown, 29–31 January, 1990. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell International. Kerkvliet, Arnold. 1956. The Sunday Gospels and Epistles with Short Explanations in Pidgin English. Buea: Catholic Missions Press. Kerkvliet, Arnold. 1957. Pidgin English Catechism. Rome: Sodality of St. Peter Claver. Kloss, Heinz. 1967. Abstand languages and Ausbau languages. Anthropological Linguistics 9(7): 29–41. Menget, John. n.d. Mimbo Hos. Bamenda. Mu¨hleisen, Susanne. 2001. ‘How is it that in our own languages we hear the wonders of God’ – Vernacular Bible translations in colonial and postcolonial contexts. In: Stilz, Gerhard (ed.), Colonies, Missions, Cultures. Tu¨bingen: Narr. 247–263. Mu¨hleisen, Susanne. 2005. Introduction: Creole languages in Creole literatures: Status and standardization. In: Mu¨hleisen, Susanne (ed.), Creole Languages in Creole Literatures. Special Issue of Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 20(1): 1–14. Mu¨hleisen, Susanne. 2007. Language and religion. In: Hellinger, Marlis and Anne Pauwels (eds.), Handbook of Applied Linguistics Vol. 9: Language and Communication: Diversity and Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 461–493. Molindo, Rev. Ekoka A. n.d. Cameroon Pidgin Bible. http://molindo.nple.com/ jxprayer.htm. Accessed 20 August 2009. C

268

Susanne Mu¨hleisen & Eric A. Anchimbe

Mundhenk, Norm. 1990. Linguistic decisions in the Tok Pisin Bible. In: Verhaar S. J., John W. M. (ed.), Melanesian Pidgin and Tok Pisin: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Pidgins and Creoles in Melanesia. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 345–374. Neba, Ayu’nwi N., Evelyn F. Chibaka and Gratien G. Atindogbe´. 2006. Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE) as a tool for empowerment and national development. African Study Monographs 27(2): 39–61. Nida, Eugene A. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill. Nkengasong, Nkemngong John. 2006. The Widow’s Might. Yaounde: Editions CLE. Ong, Walter. 2002. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Taylor and Francis. Plissonneau, Joseph. 1926. Catechisme. Metz: Louis Hellenbrand. Romaine, Suzanne. 2005. Orthographic practices in the standardization of pidgins and creoles: Pidgin in Hawai’i as anti-language and anti-standard. In: Mu¨hleisen, Susanne (ed.), Creole Languages in Creole Literatures. Special Issue of Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 20(1): 101–140. Sala, Bonaventure M. 2009. Writing in Cameroon Pidgin English: Begging the question. English Today 25(2): 11–17. Schleiermacher, Friedrich. 2004 [1813]. On the di¤erent methods of translating. Translated by Susan Bernofsky. In: Venuti, Lawrence (ed), pp. 43–63. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Narr. Socie´te´ Biblique. 1966. Di Gud Nyus Hawe St. Mark Bi Ratam. Cameroun-Gabon: Socie´te´ Biblique. Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Todd, Loreto. 1974. Pidgins and Creoles. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Todd, Loreto. 1979. Some Day Been Dey: West African Pidgin Folktales. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Todd, Loreto and Martin Jumbam. 1992. Kamtok: Anatomy of a Pidgin. English Today 8(1): 3–11. Vakunta, Peter Wuteh. 2008. Majunga Tok: Poems in Pidgin English. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG. Venuti, Lawrence (ed.). 2004. The Translation Studies Reader. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge. Vinay, Jean-Paul and Jean Darbelnet. 2004 [1958]. A methodology for translation. In: Venuti, Lawrence (ed.), pp. 128–143. Winer, Lise. 1990. Orthographic standardization for Trinidad and Tobago: Linguistic and sociopolitical considerations in an English Creole community. Language Problems and Language Planning 14: 237–268.

Chapter 12 German colonial influences on, and representations of, Cameroon Pidgin English Brigitte Weber 1. Introduction The study of language contact (Weinreich 1953) continues to be significant for the analysis of Pidgin and Creole languages (Schuchardt 1882). The early contacts of Africans with Europeans on the West African Coast laid the foundation for the emergence and evolution of ‘West African Pidgin English’. Colonialism contributed to the diverse linguistic set up of those geographical areas where a variety of West African Pidgin was (and still is) spoken. The history of Cameroon, for instance, could be traced along the paths of the Pidgin English spoken in this part of Africa. The study of contact-induced language change is part of historical linguistics, and so for the following analysis, an essentially diachronic approach has been adopted. Since the 1960s a few extensive studies have been carried out on CPE. Among the earliest is Schneider’s (1966) descriptive linguistic analysis with texts and glossary from the Cameroon area. In 1966, too, a useful teaching manual ‘produced for the United States Peace Corps’ by Dwyer (1966): An Introduction to West African Pidgin English, was published. It o¤ers grammatical analyses of, and conversations in, CPE as well as cultural background information about Cameroon and the zones where CPE is most widely spoken. It also devotes special attention to semantics (p. iii), and given that it is a training course, its content and approach are largely ‘‘determined by pedagogical considerations’’ (p. ii). The glossary contains six categories of items, sorted according to their geographical origin. One category refers to Nigeria only, and the rest to di¤erent parts of Cameroon or to Cameroon and Nigeria together. Todd (1969) in her thesis, Pidgin English of West Cameroon, looks at di¤erent varieties of CPE from the North West province based on area of origin and educational level of informants. Besides sociolinguistic issues, she describes the grammatical system of CPE, including its tense and aspect system, which is summarised by Schro¨der (this volume).

270

Brigitte Weber

Gilman (1972: 198) shows in his doctoral dissertation: The Comparative Structure in French, English, and Cameroonian Pidgin English that ‘‘Pidgin is more like many African languages than like any European language’’. Later, in his article ‘‘Cameroonian Pidgin English. A Neo-African language’’, Gilman (1979: 272) suggests that Pidgin – as opposed to ‘‘imperfectly-learned English which disappears with further knowledge’’ – and English exist side by side and are used for separate purposes. This stance is dramatically di¤erent from Mbassi-Manga’s (1976: 63) in the article ‘‘The state of contemporary English in Cameroon’’, in which he says ‘‘PE [Pidgin English] and EDE [Educated English] can be considered as one language’’. Mbassi-Manga’s (1973) doctoral dissertation, English in Cameroon: A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends, compares CPE varieties both from the anglophone and francophone areas. Although he makes mention of English in the title, the dissertation is indeed about CPE. Focus therein is on both historical contacts and outcomes and current features of its grammatical system. Two further doctoral dissertations by Ngome (1982): Cameroon Pidgin English Vocabulary: A Lexico-Semantic Study, and Merelyn Bates-Mims (1986): Chez les Noirs: A Comparative-Historical Analysis of Pidgin and Creole Languages reveal the Africaness of this Pidgin. For instance, Ngome (1982: 5) suggests that ‘‘the CPE-Basilect is essentially an African language [. . .] its lexical items are based on indigenous meanings and concepts.’’ In a note, Ngome (1982: 54) further points out that CPE ‘‘is now so nativised as to be just one of the [indigenous] languages, but one of a di¤erent genetic origin.’’ He even concludes that the o‰cial languages, English and French, might be ‘‘modified in the direction of CPE and the indigenous languages’’ (p. 295). Bates-Mims (1986: i) proposes a comparative historical study, in which she identifies West Africa as the ‘‘source and origin and development of African diaspora languages’’ in order to demonstrate the grammatical similarities in features between Cameroon Pidgin and Louisiana Creole. Most of the studies above make reference to the African substrate base in CPE. Two other works on the grammar and sociolinguistics of CPE can be quoted here: Fe´ral (1989) and Schro¨der (2003). Fe´ral’s study, besides its focus on sociolinguistic co-existence and the place of certain indigenous languages like Duala, deals extensively with certain aspects of the grammatical system of a francophone variety of CPE. Schro¨der (2003) concentrates on the status and functions of CPE and its prospects as a national language of the country in the future.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

271

However, little attention has been paid to German influences on CPE. Todd, in her manifold contributions on CPE, discovered German sources in the lexicon and suggested further and in depth studies on them. The aim of this chapter is to shed some light on the language situation and language policy during German administration on the one hand and to provide an analysis of possible influences from German on present-day CPE on the other. By adding another stratum to ongoing linguistic research on CPE, this chapter contributes to the description of the rich diversity of the language.

2. Language contacts: Historical and sociocultural factors The first German presence on the West African Coast goes back to 1680 when two Brandenburgian ships sailing to the Gulf of Guinea returned home with goods like gold and ivory. Soon more ships landed and a castle was built on the Gold Coast, called Grossfriedrichsburg, in honour of Friedrich Wilhelm, the Great Elector of Brandenburg, Germany. Wilhelm’s endeavour to gain overseas territories and develop trade with the help of these possessions made him the model of future commercial policy. Friedrich Wilhelm can be considered as the spiritual father of the German colonial policy between 1884/85 and 1918/19. Treaty negotiations between Brandenburgians and African chiefs led to the foundation of the Brandenburg-African Company. As the overseas trade did not prove profitable for Germany, Friedrich Wilhelm sold the colony of Grossfriedrichsburg to the Dutch West Indian company. Huber (1999: 40) believes that the Germans communicated in Ahanta, the African language of this West African area. Often the village headman called ‘caboceer’ (a Portuguese-derived word) acted as an interpreter. Members of one of the Brandenburg expeditions reported in Low German that ‘‘the caboceer is sent on errands on account of his command of the Low German language’’ (translation by Huber, 1999: 52). Caboceers continued to fill the post of interpreters in the 20th century. Before German colonialism o‰cially started, a considerable number of Germans were registered (Huber 1999: 60) among the di¤erent population groups in the settlement of the Sierra Leone1 peninsula in the first half of the 19th century. Even though the Europeans were not numerous, their 1. Sierra Leone was seen as the place of origin for West African Pidgin English as early as 1892 by Paul Grade (1892: 7).

272

Brigitte Weber

positions as administrators, missionaries and traders were very prestigious. In some respects, each of the population groups in the Sierra Leone Colony contributed to the emergence of Krio, the Creole spoken in Sierra Leone, which has been found to have exerted great influence on Cameroon Pidgin English in particular (Hancock 1971: 113¤, Todd 1979: 286¤ ). With regard to the German settlers of the Sierra Leone Colony, however, there does not seem to be any attested linguistic influence as yet. Even though in Krio as well as in CPE the core vocabulary is drawn from English, of course, Todd (1979: 286) found that both languages share items whose meanings di¤er from the English cognate and she also identified items which can be traced to Yoruba with which Krio is in close contact, yet CPE is not (Todd 1979: 287). This particular resemblance of the two languages seems due to the fact that CPE and Krio are closely related forms of one language: namely 19th century Krio. Even similar cultural themes suggest a closer connection than just a common West African heritage (Todd 1979: 289). Occasional di¤erences suggest the possible influence of German in Cameroon. The following nine items, in particular, may illustrate such influence: (1) CPE chop: German may have influenced the use of chop taking into account the following links: schoppen means ‘‘eating greedily and quickly’’ in the Southwestern German dialects (Kluge 1989), as well as to stu¤ geese (Wahrig 1986). Hagen (1908: 6) transcribes CPE chop as ‘schop’. (Engl. orthography: shop). I have even heard the onset pronounced as an a¤ricate by a woman in Salzburg. Other influences might include Engl. ‘chop’ to cut, later ‘a slice of meat with bone’ (Oxford Dict. of Engl. Etymology) and in the late 17th cent. Engl. ‘chop-house’. Although ‘chop’ is also used in Krio, ‘it’ for ‘eat’ is also used as its synonym in Krio. CPE uses only ‘chop’. The existence of a similar word in German appears to have reinforced its survival in CPE. In other varieties of West African Pidgin English (WAPE) the verb ‘nyam’ (Engl. eat; food) has been attested (Huber 1999: 85). (2) CPE fit: The English modal ‘can’ is expressed with the Germanicbased ‘fit’ (from Dutch and Flemish ‘vitten’ of the 16th–17th centuries, meaning ‘to suit’, ‘adapt’) and in Krio with ‘ebul’, the Roman-based English ‘able’ (from Lat. base verb habere > adj. ‘habilis’ meaning ‘suitable’).

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

273

(3) CPE kasingo: (Koloniale Rundschau 1909: 11, Kouega 2008: 102) meaning ‘whip’, ‘cane’ derived from kaisa i gnu ‘the Kaiser’s whip’. Krio maintains the English-based words ‘wip’ for whip and ‘ken’ for cane (Fyle and Jones 1980). (4) CPE kini 2: meaning Engl. ‘kneel’, German ‘knien’ or Engl. ‘curtsey’, German ‘Knicks’, both derived from ‘Knie’ (knee). It is the knee which bends to make the female movement of respect. ‘Kini’3 is used in CPE to express both the English noun ‘knee’ and the verb ‘to kneel down’ although in English ‘k’ had been dropped in the 17th century (Pinsker 1974: 92). Keeping the ‘‘k’’ in pronunciation and orthography proves to be an obvious Germanism. The acrolectal form ‘ni’ coexists with ‘kini’ still today. (5) CPE kombi (Todd 1991: 85) meaning ‘friend’ or ‘compy’ (Spreekwoorden in Pidgin, West Cameroon: 2; 9)4 di¤ers from ‘padi’ meaning ‘close friend’ in Krio. ‘Kombi’/‘compy’ suggests Germanic influence: English ‘companion’ and German ‘Kompagnon’, ‘Kumpane’ and ‘Kumpel’ (Wahrig: Deutsches Wo¨rterbuch 1986) are derived from the same source: Latin ‘cum (together with) þ pane’ (from ‘panis’ bread), meaning ‘‘one who eats the bread with me’’. ‘Kumpel’ is very frequent in German for a group of youngsters involved in the same adventure or work (particularly coal mining). (It also occurs as ‘Kumpi’). English ‘companion’ includes the idea of sharing (OED) but it does not seem to be as much in use in everyday conversation and, to my knowledge, there is no short form. In French, the use of ‘copain’ is quite frequent. Krio ‘padi’ might be derived from Am. Engl. ‘buddy’, a possible alteration of ‘brother’ (Online Etymology Dictionary). (6) CPE lanboi (Gud Nyus fo ol Pipul, 2000), Krio ‘disaypul’ (Fyle and Jones 1980), both for Engl. ‘disciple’. CPE lanboi suggests German influence in that it is a calque from German ‘Lehrbub’ (lit.: learn boy). (7) CPE okrika: meaning ‘second hand stu¤’, especially clothes and shoes. From German ‘alter Krimskrams’. Krio: ‘secondhand/ sekenan/klos’ or rather ‘ol klos’ (Engl. used clothes). However, Okrikra is a town and port in southern Nigeria where all sorts of 2. Still used around 1971, as attested in Hancock’s (1971: 119) comparison of seven Atlantic Creoles. 3. One should not overlook the orthographic influence of the Dutch priests in Cameroon who used ‘kini’ in their translations (Father Kerkvliet in particular). 4. A Dutch collection of pidgin phrases from Yaounde.

274

Brigitte Weber

items were landed. This suggests that any kind of old stu¤ was called okrika due to its geographical provenance (Todd, personal communication; Encyclopedia Britannica Online) (8) CPE swine: (Grimm 1933: 154);5 schwein (Hagen 1908: 48) is obviously influenced by German ‘Schwein’. It might even have been pronounced /shvain? since Sala and Ngefac (2006: 34) illustrate the replacement of /sh/ by /s/ at word-initial position in present-day CPE. Krio rather uses ‘pig’ as does English today except in literary contexts. It has been applied to persons from P2000 on (Online Etymology Dictionary) (9) CPE toslam (Ngome 1982: 260); tosilam (Kouega 2008: 133) seems to be of German origin as English ‘torch’ has never been a compound with a second component ‘lamp’. In Krio it appears as ‘torch’ /toch/. There is another feature common to CPE and German/Dutch which di¤ers from Krio: the devoicing of the final consonant. Even if Huber (1999: 175) finds great variation in Ghanaian Pidgin English, where ‘‘voiced and unvoiced variants of the same word are often encountered in the same speaker,’’ Krio seems more influenced by British English. Although many speakers of African languages might have devoiced word-final consonants, such devoicing does not seem to be as regular and systematic as in CPE. German influence obviously plays a part and is reinforced by the fact that in Tok Pisin, the English-based Creole of another former German colony, a similar regular devoicing can be found. For more on this, see Mihalic (1971) and Romaine (1992).

3. The arrival of the Germans in Cameroon A treaty on behalf of the German Chancellor Bismarck with the Duala Kings Akwa and Bell set their territories, the area opposite the island of Fernando Po in the Bay of Biafra, under German ‘protection’. It was in July 1884 that this o‰cial occupation by Germany started. This treaty was signed on behalf of Germany by the Woermann Company (Wolf 5. The German Kersten Du¨ring, who experienced the outbreak of World War I when he was looking for oil in Cameroon, left diary notes and an exchange of letters with his fiance´e as valuable personal documents. They served as a basis for this first person novel by Hans Grimm.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

275

2001: 52). The settlement consisted of about three villages called after the Duala chiefs Akwa, Bell and Deido (today quarters of the city of Duala are still named after these three chiefs). The Germans called it ‘Kamerun Stadt’ and eventually ‘Kamerun’ became the name for the whole protectorate. The medical doctor Gustav Nachtigal, an explorer and former German consul in Tunis, had been sent to the coast of Guinea by Chancellor Bismarck to investigate the ‘‘state of German commerce’’ in the area (Le Vine 1971: 4) and finally signed the friendship-trading and protectorate treaties there. Before he continued his trip to Southwest Africa, he established Dr. Buchner as the temporary representative of the German Reich for Cameroon and Bimbia, a kingdom near Douala and a significant outpost for Baptist evangelisation from the 1840s. German o‰cials were often called to settle cases (palavers) among natives either in Pidgin or in an indigenous language with (German-speaking) natives as interpreters. The jungle, wild animals and insects, diseases, and hostile natives were major obstacles to German expansion. But the Germans made steady progress into the hinterland over the next two decades. As the geographical situation seemed favourable enough, they decided to dry out the swamp and use it for economic purposes. While the Germans were building the first railway, many of them died of malaria because of the damp climate and the mosquitoes. In 1901, Buea became the capital because the Germans found the climate there more agreeable. With the increased German presence in Buea, Pidgin as it was spoken there was bound to have German influences, and the Germans spread the Pidgin features they brought with them from other regions. The Deutsche Kolonialzeitung (August 1908) contains an article on the history of the exploitation and conquest of Cameroon. When, in 1884, the German flag was hoisted at the Cameroon River, the country was relatively unexplored by Europeans due to the thick jungle, the unhealthy climate and the ‘‘jealous natives with their blocked trade’’.6 From the 19th century, however, several travel accounts describe scientific expeditions, and contain studies of indigenous languages. CPE is generally mentioned in some of these accounts, sometimes in passing and sometimes in greater detail. From 1885 on, the Germans started systematic expeditions throughout the country. While they first explored the South, the English and the 6. The Dualas, for instance, did not want to give up their economic supremacy as middlemen between the traders of the hinterland and the Europeans of the coastal region.

276

Brigitte Weber

French had easier access to the interior of the country by moving along the rivers from their own colonies. Eugen Zintgra¤ (1895) succeeded in breaking through the jungle to the highlands. He founded the station Baliburg,7 which was intended to be a German base for the hinterland. The German administration developed a basic infrastructure: wharves and docks at Duala, Kribi, Campo, Tiko, and Victoria; rail lines north from Duala to Nkongsamba and west almost to Yaounde as well as the railroad serving the Victoria plantation; a large number of bridges, roads and paths; and well constructed public and private buildings, many of which are still in use today. The productive plantation economy today can also be attributed to German initiative (Le Vine 1971: 5, De Lancey and Mokeba 1990). The Germans have been accused of using harsh methods in order to achieve their aims. As shown in example (7) above, CPE still has the expression kasingo ‘whip’, ‘cane’ derived from kaisa i gnu ‘the Kaiser’s whip’. In the Koloniale Rundschau (1909: 11), it is written that all colonial work done by indigenous Cameroonians was voluntary. Rudin (1960: 221¤.) and Eckart (1997: 231¤.), however, see this from a di¤erent angle. Natives were often bound together during the journey from their homes to the plantations (Rudin 1938: 326). Planters placed the workers in barracks, sometimes all mixed together without regard for regional di¤erences or considerations of whether members of certain tribes were hostile to each other (Rudin 1938: 327). The enforced labourers must have had some means of communicating with each other beyond their regional languages and dialects, a lingua franca like Pidgin English. Todd (1975: 232) believes that Pidgin English was used among natives especially on these large plantations. By 1913, there were 58 plantations and 185 planters, who employed 17,827 native workers (Rudin 1938: 222). Yet, Le Vine (1971: 6) points out that whatever can be said of some of their methods or motives, the Germans maintained a colonial administration in the Kamerun that compares favorably with any other in Africa at the time [. . .]. The ‘‘Kamerun’’ became [. . .] a potent and evocative symbol of a half-mythical ‘‘golden age’’ when the Cameroon was one and undivided.

7. Baliburg (Bali castle) was a military base near the town of Bali. The Bali were the ‘‘major ally of the Germans during the period of German conquest of the Bamenda region’’ (De Lancey and Mokeba 1990: 35).

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

277

Before colonisation, it was the ethnic background that defined cultural and linguistic identification. When Cameroon became a polity under German administration in 1884, an awareness of national identity arose for the first time. Those thirty-two years have certainly had a strong impact on Cameroon’s population. Although the natives’ identity was still based on their ethnic cultural background, an additional national identityawareness was born, grounded on a feeling of unity and togetherness under the German Colonial Government. The German language was not imposed, however, and the general German policy was to interfere as little as possible in tribal life and customs (Rudin 1938: 213). CPE, which was already well established in the Grasslands when the Germans took control, was used for evangelisation and also in administration. After this brief history, the next section explores the Germans’ use of language and reactions to CPE.

4. German literature on language use 4.1. Pedagogic documents, newspaper articles, reports, diaries and books on CPE In this section, a small selection of original documents such as language observations, pedagogic documents, and notes written by Germans will be examined briefly. These documents relate to the variety of West African ‘Negro English’ spoken around 1900 in Cameroon. A rich source of these documents is the ‘Schuchardt Nachlaß’ (Wolf 1993) (i.e. Schuchardt’s8 literary and partly handwritten legacy) located at the university library in Graz, Austria. The following speech samples (10) a‰liated to the same archive tub of the Schuchardt Nachlaß as ‘West African Negro English’,9 are located in the section of the ‘working manuscripts’ (number eleven)10. The original shows a di¤erent kind of handwriting from Schuchardt’s. These samples seem to have originated from Schuchardt’s correspondence. The handwriting of the German correspondent alternates between German handwritten 8. For more on Schuchardt’s work, see Markey (1979) and Gilbert (1985). 9. Englisch in Westafrika was translated by Glenn G. Gilbert (1985) and commented in German by Viereck (1987). There is another translation by Thomas Markey (1979). Both of Schuchardt’s translations appeared independently of each other. 10. 11.2.6.Westafrika and 11.2.6.7. 1 Blatt. Sprachproben [fr. Hs.]

278

Brigitte Weber

Gothic and Latin for the Crooboys’ (Kru Boys) Pidgin. The German and the Pidgin samples are taken directly from the archives11 while the English translations were done by me (10): (10) Einige Redensarten, die von Crooboys gebraucht werden. (Some phrases used by Crooboys). a. Das Schi¤ wird heute Nacht hier bleiben. ¼The ship go sleep here tonight. (The ship will stay here tonight) b. Ich bin sehr hungrig, Meister. ¼Hungry ketch me too much, master. (I am very hungry, Master) c. Sei so gut Herr und gib mir ein Geschenk fu¨r meine Leute. ¼Master do you please give me some dash for my people (oder/or boys). (Master, be so kind as to give me a present for my people) d. Ich kann alles arbeiten. ¼I save work everything. (I can do everything) e. Wenn du mich nach meinem Lande sendest, werde ich dir gute Leute zum Arbeiten bringen. ¼Suppose you go send me for my country, I go bring you proper people for work. (If you send me to my country, I’ll bring you good people for work) f. Wenn du mir nicht mehr Lohn gibst, kann ich nicht la¨nger bei dir bleiben. ¼Suppose you don’t give me more pay, I no fit stop any more with you. (If you don’t give me higher wages, I can’t stay with you any longer) g. Der Hauptmann hat mich zu sehr geschlagen, gewiß muß ich sterben. ¼Them headman flog me too much, I go die for true. (The headman beat me too much, I will certainly die) h. Dieses Boot ist zu groß, wir ko¨nnen nicht damit arbeiten, weil die See auch sehr schlecht ist. ¼Them boat be too big, we no fit work him, because them sea also bad too much. (This boat is too big, we cannot work with it because the sea is also very bad/ rough) i. Ich habe einen Brief erhalten, ich solle heimkommen. ¼I received some book, for go home for we country. (I received a letter saying I should go home)

11. The writer of this document (including translation) is unknown. It is marked by fr. Hs. ¼ ‘fremde Handschrift’ (foreign handwriting). Schuchardt Nachlass 11.2 6 7.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

279

The orthography of the Kru Boys’ speech is similar to that of English. Many Germans had some knowledge of English and regularly transferred its spelling to transcriptions of Pidgin English. There may be German influence in the spelling of ‘catch’ as ‘ketch’12 where the English open, front, unrounded vowel /æ/ may have been replaced by the mid, front, unrounded /e/ vowel of German (10b). In grammar, there is a mixture of English and Pidgin features. For instance, the English first person singular pronoun ‘I’ is used in spelling and not ‘A’ as usual in later CPE (10d, e, f, g, h); and the degree adverb ‘too big’ appears with Pidgin ‘bad too much’ (10h) in the same sentence. The use of the auxiliary ‘save’ (pronounced savi), meaning ‘to know’ (10d) is the same as in CPE today. Even the meaning of habituality might have been included in this sentence by the Kruboys. The use of ‘go’ (10a, g), suggesting the future, is the same as in CPE today. Some of the vocabulary is probably based on African imagery, as ‘the ship go sleep [. . .]’ (10a). Grade (1892: 43)13 quotes similar cases as in (11) below: (11) a. b. c.

them steamer go sleep here for night (the steamer will lie at anchor here tonight) them steamer him belly be full (the steamer is loaded) them steamer be hungry (the steamer can still load cargo)

‘Suppose’ (10e) introducing a conditional clause and ‘stop’ for English ‘stay’ (10f ) were used in the varieties of Pidgin English in other German protectorates as well, e.g. Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea. Colonial o‰cers were exchanged between the di¤erent German colonies and it is possible that they introduced certain expressions from one colony to another. Bilong > blan e.g. ‘‘. . . one pig, who blan for me, live for die. . .’’ (Grade 1892: 45), suppose (if ), meri (young woman),14 kanaka/ganako (unpleasant term for a worker) can be found in Papua New Guinea as well as in Cameroon around this period. Some of these, e.g. bilong, kanaka, and meri might have disappeared in present day CPE. 12. This claim is disputable because there is evidence that ‘catch’ was often pronounced ‘ketch’ in English. Indeed, the boat, a ‘ketch’ was often spelt ‘catch’. 13. Paul Grade, Dr. of Law, secretary and interim Imperial O‰cer in Togo from 21st July 1885 to 22nd October 1887. In his introduction to ‘‘Das Negerenglisch an der Westku¨ste von Afrika’’ (1892), Grade points out that after several years of residence in Togo and Cameroon he believed that the ‘Negerenglisch’ spoken in both countries was worth a systematic description, resulting in the above mentioned article by him in the journal Anglia. 14. Dat meri i fain na dai (that young woman was unbelievably beautiful) (Recorded in storytelling session, Djottin, Cameroon, 1967 by Loreto Todd).

280

Brigitte Weber

The most essential document during the Germans’ presence in Cameroon is Gunther von Hagen’s Kurzes Handbuch fu¨r Neger ¼ Englisch15 an der Westku¨ste Afrikas unter besonderer Beru¨cksichtigung von Kamerun (Berlin, 1908). It is divided into four parts: 1) General language rules, 2) Vocabulary index, 3) Idioms, and 4) Exercises for language practice. The author, a lieutenant in the German colonial army, emphasises the urgent need for a manual of ‘Negerenglisch’ by means of which ‘‘everyday needs can be asked for at any time’’ (p. 3). As he points out in his preface, this guide is important because most Germans, above all o‰cers, traders and sergeants, have to move inland only a few days after their arrival in Africa, guided only by a couple of Africans but not an experienced white guide. If the Germans of the colonial army are not able to communicate with the Africans of their group, then they will have to rely on their arbitrariness in every day life. This might result in di‰culties regarding board and lodging, thus causing unnecessary delays in the troop’s itinerary (p. 3). Hagen (1908: 3) further advises that ‘‘with some knowledge of this language it is possible to communicate within the whole protectorate as there are natives everywhere who speak it and thus can serve as interpreters’’ (my translation). Before introducing the list of words, he explains some general language rules; e.g. pronunciation and the signs used for its illustration, and also the special use of verbs. He shows that there is no inflection but addresses the problem of aspect in CPE illustrating that ‘‘the arrival of a person can be expressed in three ways’’ (12): (12) a. b. c.

He come (meaning: he is coming but still far away) He live for come (meaning: he is coming and can be seen already) He don’t come (deviant from English and meaning: he has just come): yi don kam (in CPE today)

In terms of grammar, Hagen (1908: 58–62), as opposed to Buchner in 1886, recognises the expression of recent past with don yet written as don’t. He also shows that the progressive and inceptive aspect is expressed by live for as in example (13): (13) a. b. c.

Lamina lif for kom (Hagen 1908: 62) (Lamina is coming) potta-potta lif bifor (Hagen 1908: 61) (There is a swamp in front) elefant lif for busch? (Hagen 1908: 58) (Are there any elephants in the bush?)

15. The sign ¼ was used as a hyphen in 19th century documents.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

281

In all three sentences in (13), lif is used to express existence. Although in CPE today it has been replaced by de, it still occurred in Cameroon comparatively recently and is also found in early liturgical documents (Todd, personal communication). The construction in (14a) may well have been influenced by the German construction in 14b; which would be the English version in 14c: (14) a. b. c.

man no fit pass dem potta-potta (Hagen 1908: 50) (The swamp is not accessible / walkable) man kann nicht durch den Sumpf gehen. you cannot go via/cross the swamp. (literally: One cannot pass the swamp)

Still at the level of syntax, German influence is also visible. German word order might be seen in (15a) and (15b): (15) a.

b.

oal kago ko¨m for dem palawerhaus inseit (Hagen 1908: 51). German: ‘Alle Lasten kommen in das Palaverhaus hinein’. (All cargo goes inside the Palaver house) koal dem soldjer for autseit back (Hagen 1908: 65). German: Rufe die Soldaten draussen zuru¨ck. (Call back the soldiers outside)

The second component of German compound verbs (hinein-kommen, zuru¨ck-rufen) is always last in a sentence, whereas in English the basic order SVO applies to declarative as well as imperative sentences. German structure serves as a model for ‘Negerenglisch’ here. The typically German ‘external possessor’ construction is apparent in the sentence in (16): (16) (oal ) mei skin hot mi (Hagen 1908: 44). German: ‘die/meine Haut brennt mir’. (My skin stings/burns) Hot, probably meaning ‘hurt’, might have been taken as ‘hot’ by the Germans when they translated it with ‘‘brennen’’ (burn). In this typically German construction there are two di¤erent arguments: a subject (skin/Haut) and a dative NP (mi/mir). In the English sentence, however, possessor and possessum are expressed by one phrase. In the CPE sentence, mi is redundant, as is German ‘meine’. A similar construction in present-day Pidgin would be example (17): (17) Krash mi ma bak, a beg (scratch my back, please) German: Bitte, kratze mir den Ru¨cken. (Dialectal: Kratz mir mein’ Ru¨cken)

282

Brigitte Weber

Body parts take the definite and not the possessive article in Standard German, yet they sometimes do in colloquial speech (see above). They always take the possessive determiner (pronoun) in English. CPE seems influenced by both. There is one argument more like in the German sentence, and the body part is determined by a possessive pronoun as in English and also German vernacular. Although CPE draws from both languages, German is more strongly represented. As is stated by Ko¨nig and Gast (2007: 115) ‘‘an external possessor is generally encoded by a dative object in German. The traditional term employed in grammars of German for this use of the dative is ‘Pertinenzdativ’ or ‘dative of possession’’. This is unique of German and also observable in CPE, particularly in documents written by Germans. As Hagen’s manual is an important document prepared by Germans for Germans, it is likely that possible German influences or reinforcements on today’s CPE may have come from it. Thus, it seems reasonable to point out the semantic areas where this might have occurred. German lexical items were simply adopted as such in the field of military discipline as in (18): (18) Soldat K. zur Stelle! (Soldier K. reporting!) jawohl! (Yes. Sir!) marsch! (forward march!) Posten (guard) halt! Stillgestanden! (stop) trommel (drum) As far as professions related to colonial administration and life are concerned, the word in (19a) is readily used in Hagen’s (1908) manual. To this, one could also add words for food and nutrition (19b, c): (19) a. b. c.

waschmann (washerman) zucker (sugar cane, sugar) tomate (tomato)

Two words above (19b, c) have two possible origins, English and German. The word suka < Zucker, shuga < sugar is also attested in Kouega (2008: 130). This does not derail the argument made here because as Mu¨hlha¨usler (1997: 2) explains Pidgin and Creole languages emerge as vehicles of intercommunication. . .coincidence of form and similarity of meaning across languages will give a word a high survival rate’’. There are also literal translations from German, as in (20):

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

(20) CPE (Hagen

283

German

English

allzeit (and Dutch altijd ) alle halbe Stunde (auf ) einmal blasen

always half-hourly, every half hour at a single blow, at once blow (a whistle)

1908: 43–66) oalteim (p. 66) oal haf auer (p. 65) won teim (p. 44) blas (p. 43)

Certain German characteristics may be found in pronunciation, as it is reflected in orthography. It is not a spelling pronunciation but a ‘pronunciation spelling’. This means that the Germans’ pronunciation of English words was represented in the way they wrote ‘Negerenglisch’ as the replacements of English sounds in the following words show (21): (21) The unrounded front open vowel /ð/ is replaced by the front mid /e/ as in: at ! et (p. 57) and ! end (p. 56) catch ! ketsch (p. 26) alligator ! elligetor (p. 29) The English voiced dental fricative /¶/ is replaced either by the voiceless alveolar fricative /s/ (22a, b) or by the voiced alveolar plosive /d/ as in (22c, d): (22) a. b. c. d.

that ! set (p. 64) other ! oser (p. 64) them ! dem (pp. 56, 67) there ! der (p. 57)

The German article and pronoun ‘der’ (Nom.) and ‘dem’ (Dat.) may have contributed to the fact that only in these two cases the voiced alveolar plosive is used, i.e. ‘there’ and ‘them’ (22c, d). As German does not have the diphthongs /ei/ and /ou/ they do not appear in spelling in Hagen’s (1908) manual. For these two, the monophthongs /e/ and /o/ are used (23): (23) pay ! pe (p. 67) make a report ! mek Meldung (p. 65) paper ! peper (p. 45) soup plate ! supplet (p. 45) alligator ! elligetor (p. 29) change ! schentsch (p. 65) shadow ! schedo (p. 32) stone ! ston (p. 32)

284

Brigitte Weber

Furthermore, in explaining pronunciation rules, i.e. under the section ‘general rules’, Hagen (1908) indicates that diphthongs as they appear, have to be read as if they were German. He, therefore, gives the following examples (24): (24) /ei/ for English /ai/ as in frei (fry), leims (limes) (p. 5) and ei for English ‘I’ (p. 62) /eu/ for English /ı/ as in her-eul (hairoil) (p. 66), beus (boys) (p. 52), speul (spoil) (p. 49), peusen (poison) (p. 48). A few examples of final consonant devoicing, a common phenomenon in German, are attested for CPE as the examples in 25, still from Hagen’s (1908) manual, show: (25) head ! het (p. 56) move ! muf (p. 56) bread ! bret (p. 5) The English a¤ricates /t§/ and /d‰/ are not reflected in Hagen’s (1908) orthography, since they do not occur in the pronunciation of the German equivalent as in (26): (26)

– bandage ! bandasch (p. 64): German ‘Bandage’ is a loan from French – change ! schentsch (p. 65): German ‘changieren’16 is based on French ‘changer’ – chop (food) ! schop (p. 64): German ‘schoppen’/’Schoppen’ is based on Old French ’chopine’, a unit of measurement – watch ! wache (p. 64): German ‘Wache’

African substrate influence is apparent in the alternate use of /l/ and /r/, as in (27), still from Hagen (1908). By way of analogy, no phonemic distinction existed between [l] and [r] in the earliest form of Afro-American dialects (Alleyne 1980: 61). A voiced alveolar lateral still exists in some idiolects in Cameroon for both sounds (Todd 1984: 101) but has been replaced by the respective /l/ or /r/ sound with increased education and with exposure to English and French vocabulary.

16. An expression used in equitation and hunting terminology. There was a high number of French loans in 19th century German.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

(27)

285

– labourer ! lebeller (p. 21) (porters) – barrack-master/soldier ! ballik-massa/soldjer (p. 22) (o‰cer/ soldier of the colonial Army) – in the middle ! for mundro (p. 57, 58) CPE mindru is attested in later research (Todd, personal communication)

Hagen’s (1908) way of dealing with pronunciation is presented according to the phonetic system employed in the Method of Toussaint – Langenscheidt (1856). The German Gustav Langenscheidt created the first easy-to-use phonetic system. It was, however, much influenced by the German spelling system and orthography. For an extract of Hagen’s (1908) manual in Gothic script with annotations for pronunciation and stress, see Appendix 1. Whereas the Germans were inclined to include English or Pidgin expressions in written texts, it was the other way around in oral communication, in that they inserted German elements in ‘Negerenglisch’. This can be found in Hagen’s (1908: 60) guidelines for conversation practice (28). Once more, the English translations are mine: (28) a. b. c.

tri tale ßoldjer zur Stelle ! 30 Soldaten zur Stelle! (p. 60) (Three tally soldier reporting) gut, luk proper out! ! Gut, passt ordentlich auf! (p. 60) (good, watch out properly) Mi ei wont mek soldjer work ! Ich will Soldat werden. (p. 46) (I would like to do a soldier’s work)

Example (28a) uses a German expression, (28b) shows German word order and does not distinguish between adjectives and adverbs – as German does not either – and (28c)17 is a semantic interference from German with regard to the use of ‘make’. 4.2. O‰cial reports There are o‰cial and personal reports from representatives of the German Ministry of Foreign A¤airs who were ordered to explore certain areas of Cameroon. In all of these reports, one part is usually devoted to the language question. Some of the most important are Eugen Zintgra¤’s (1886– 1892), Dr. Mansfeld’s and Franz Hutter’s. The language question is also discussed in newspaper and magazine articles, both in Germany and Cameroon. These include: 1) Koloniale Rundschau, a monthly ‘‘for the

17. The emphatic construction ‘mi, a’ (Engl. me, I) in example 26c is still prevalent in CPE today.

286

Brigitte Weber

interests of our protectorates and their inhabitants’’;18 2) the annual report from the Colonial O‰ce (Reichskolonialamt); 3) Deutsches Kolonialblatt; 4) Kamerun-Post, and 5) Unabha¨ngiges und einziges Organ fu¨r die wirtschaftlichen Interessen der deutschen Schutzgebiete Kamerun und Togo (independent and only organ for the economic interests of the German Protectorates Cameroon and Togo). Furthermore, there are also books and diaries written during German administration that make references to language use and examples of ‘Negerenglisch’ or ‘Kamerun-Englisch’. The missions published reports about their educational programmes and devoted large sections to the language question in general and more or less to the use of CPE in particular. In one of his reports, Zintgra¤ (1895: 59) criticises the Germans’ habit, when being abroad, of abandoning their language either completely or to stud it with foreign vocabulary in such a way that it results in a weird jargon (my translation). He refers to this jargon as ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’ (Coastal German). He demonstrates that merchants, traders and a great number of o‰cials ‘‘turn very much towards this vice’’. The following excerpt is from a letter in ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’, the jargon Zintgra¤ reproachfully says has been accepted and used everyday by the German authorities (for the original script, see Appendix 2). Letter in ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’ (Zintgra¤ 1895: 59) Sehr geehrter Herr! [. . .] Sie wissen ja ebenfalls, dass der trade (Handel) im river (Fluss) jetzt sehr schlecht ist. Der Preis von oil (Oel) und kernels (Kerne) ist in Europa sehr niedrig und da die kings (Ha¨uptlinge) nichts von dem altgewohnten Preis ablassen wollen, haben sie den trade gestoppt. [. . .] Dear Sirs, [. . .] You certainly know that the trade within the river is rather poor at the moment. The price of oil and kernels is very low in Europe and as the kings are not willing to lower the usual prices they stopped trading. [. . .] (My translation)

It is indeed questionable why German merchants, traders, and o‰cials use English vocabulary when writing German letters and even add a German translation in brackets which causes more e¤ort. It seems as if great importance was attached to English terminology in trading contexts, and 18. Koloniale Rundschau. Monatsschrift fu¨r die Interessen unserer Schutzgebiete und ihrer Bewohner.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

287

thus helps those who were not su‰ciently familiar with the language. Another reason is that English was already well established on the West African coast from the 18th century on (Todd 1984: 91) or probably earlier. Such German texts, interspersed with English jargon, are referred to as ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’. The English used in oral communication on the coast appears under di¤erent names in writing. Such names, as found in the German literature including newspaper articles, comprise ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’, ‘Ku¨stenenglisch’ (Hutter 1902: 60¤.), ‘Negerenglisch’, ‘Kameruner Englisch’, ‘KamerunEnglisch’ (Buchner 1886a: 4683), ‘Pigeon-Englisch’ (Deutsches Kolonialblatt 1910). CPE seems to have attracted much attention during this period and the German authorities gave a central position in their media for the discussion of the language problem, yet the o‰cials’ attitude – though negative most of the time – showed considerable indecision. The following excerpt from an article in the Koloniale Rundschau of 1913 condemns the use of ‘Negerenglisch’, yet acknowledges its usefulness for the first years of German rule as the only ‘means of communication’: So there are cases when nine tenth of the civil servants speak Negerenglisch to the employees of the government who have gone through the governmental school, who understand German and sometimes even speak it fluently. . . when the white non-commissioned o‰cer stands in front of the army (the front-line soldiers) and he improves the gun position of a soldier, he says: ‘gun more for right side’. (My translation)

Such considerations might have been more e¤ective in the first years of German rule, yet after twenty-nine years of German presence CPE seems to have gained even more ground among the German population. This does not mean, however, that German was not spoken alongside Pidgin. A similar attitude of the German administration towards Pidgin English of Papua New Guinea can be observed in an article in the Koloniale Rundschau (1911) (Friederici 1911: 92¤., see also Weber 2008: 84). An article in the Deutsches Kolonialblatt of 1910, entitled ‘‘Kamerun und die deutsche Sprache’’ (i.e. Kamerun and the German Language), touches on a similar topic about this ‘‘horrible jargon’’ called ‘‘Pigeon English’’ which has the advantage of ‘‘easy learning’’. The article seems to be a justification and an excuse for the Germans’ extensive use of the language. A section of the article is dedicated to the history of the language, and shows that it is a necessity for trade. It further questions what other resources in terms of means of communication were available for o‰cers and o‰cials then if not CPE.

288

Brigitte Weber

The Deutsche Kolonialzeitung of 1885 had set the pace not only with a column on ‘Kamerun-Englisch’, but had recorded a palaver in writing. It shows the stage of development of CPE as written down by a German. He used English spelling predominantly. Below, (29) is one of the four parts of the palaver: (29) Yellow Hawkin borne son (girl) and Mandenne come buy him and pay part money and part left. Yellow Hawkin take them money for Charly and buy small woman (woman) and pay part and part left. Charley people they look Green Hawkin him girl pass and he top (stop) him. Akwa ax (asks) Charly and Charly tell me say ‘‘I top them girl for Yellow Hawkin’’, and tell me so ‘‘and may go back for Yellow’’. Yellow tell me say ‘‘Never mind, I go give you other one’’ and Yellow Hawkin go for Mandenne and tell him say ‘‘man top him Green girl for your part money who left’’, and Mandenne take him girl and give Yellow Hawkin him girl. Yellow Hawkin take them girl and give me say ‘‘I pay you.’’ A girl was born to Yellow Hawkin and Mandenne came and bought her and paid one part of the price and left the remainder unpaid. Yellow Hawkin took the money [and went] to Charly and bought a young woman/girl and paid one part of it and left the remainder unpaid. Charley’s people saw Green Hawkin’s girl pass19 and he (Charly) held her back. Akwa asked Charly and Charly said: ‘‘I stopped (took) the girl for Yellow Hawkin’’ and went on ‘‘I go back to Yellow’’. Yellow said ‘‘never mind, I will give you another one’’. And Yellow Hawkin went to Mandenne and said to him: ‘‘Green’s girl was held back [One took Green’s girl]20 for your part of the money which was left’’, and Mandenne took his girl and gave Yellow Hawkin his. Yellow Hawkin took the girl and said: ‘‘I pay you’’. (My translation) Kamerun-Englisch was usually discussed in connection with Kru English spread by Kru Boys. It was even regarded as synonymous to Kru English (Raaflaub 1948: 96). In the above article Kru Boys are mentioned 19. This construction is typically German (das Ma¨dchen geht ihm weg) and is described as ‘external possessor’ (Ko¨nig and Gast 2007: 114). 20. The construction: man top him Green girl (Engl. One stopped [took] the girl) would be an agentless passive in English.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

289

as the language ‘instructors’ (teaching masters) not only of Europeans, but also of native Cameroonians, mainly the Dualas. ‘‘One could come across hundreds of Kru Boys from Liberia engaged in trading posts along the coast’’ (Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, November 1885). The equation of CPE with Kru English is widespread in German authors. That may be due to the close contact between Germans and Krus in all sorts of activities, mainly on ships but also in other services such the Krus’ positions as carriers or cooks. They are usually spoken of as ‘Kru Boys’. The term ‘boy’ is discussed in the Kamerun-Post (March 12th, 1913) as one of the technical terms of ‘Neger-Englisch’: It refers to the concept of a coloured native servant to a white not only in Africa but also on the coasts of Asia. Hence, the use of the term ‘boy’ by Germans has to be accepted in this connection as neither the translation ‘Diener’ (servant) nor ‘Junge’ (boy) could fully express its meaning. (My translation)

The Kru Boys are also mentioned by Buchner (1886a: 4683) in his article on the language situation and the origin of CPE, which he calls CameroonEnglish or Neger-Englisch: I understand Cameroon-English to be the mishmashed English of the Cameroons, which in principle is identical with Kru-English. The Kru-boys from Liberia who took contract work along the West-African coast were probably the language teachers of the Cameroonians as well as all the other tribes along the coast. For this reason, I could just as well have given it the title ‘Neger-Englisch’. (My translation)

Buchner’s definition of CPE is not very di¤erent from Mansfeld’s (1924) later comment. In his book Westafrika. Urwald- und Steppenbilder (Images of Jungle and Savanna) Mansfeld (1924: 31) deplores Europeans’ limited contact with indigenous languages: ‘‘Unfortunately, most Europeans in Africa don’t get beyond the Pidgin, a horrible mixture of chewed-up English and chunks of Negro language’’ (my translation). Germans frequently relate humorous episodes based on misunderstandings of language with the Krus; e.g. ‘live’ which is synonymous with ‘being at home’, understood by a German as ‘being alive’. It is perhaps because of this misunderstanding that Buchner (1886b) had earlier tried to make clear the di¤erent uses and meanings of ‘live’ as in (30):

290

Brigitte Weber

(30) a. b. c.

the verb ‘to live’ (German ‘leben’) to be there: e.g. ‘no live’ (is not there); this place live for man go wash (this is a place to swim, to bathe in) near future and progressive aspect: e.g.: he live for come (he is coming); he live for die (to be about to die, to breathe one’s last) (also see example 8 for this meaning)

As example (30c) illustrates, live (for) has been grammaticalised to a progressive/habitual (‘‘nonpunctual’’) marker (Heine and Kuteva 2002: 197). Huber (1999: 94) confirms that in West African Pidgin English live for was replaced by de ‘‘but survives only in archaic CamPE and KruPE’’. He quotes Fe´ral (1989) who holds that in the 1970s, progressive live was found only in Cameroon ‘‘where it was used exclusively by the ‘vieux papas’, by those who had seen German colonial rule’’. Buchner’s (1886b) examples of ‘live’ in 13b above seem to represent an intermediate stage where live served as a locative/existential copula (see Heine and Kuteva 2002). 5. Conclusion The above investigation of some of the documents from the German colonial period provide insights into the stage of development of CPE, the language policy of the German administration, the way Germans coped with the language situation upon their arrival in Cameroon, and the value they attached to CPE. In Germany, the attitude towards the language question was di¤erent from that of the settlers in the colonies. The language policy of the German colonial administration was marked by indecision, and as Hausen (1970: 161¤.) points out, even up to 1914 the German colonial administration was still discussing whether German, Duala, or some other African language should be used. However, according to the decree of 31st March 1913, the German language was to be introduced in the o‰cial domain (Amtsblatt 1913: 66, quoted in Hausen 1970: 161). On April 7th, 1914, a meeting took place among representatives of the government, missionaries and ethnologists about the introduction of a Standard Language for Cameroon (my translation). Colonial politicians were indignant about the use of Pidgin as can be seen in newspaper articles and reports. In Cameroon, however, Pidgin was not only used by the Germans, it was even described and studied by them; see e.g. Grade (1889, 1892), Buchner (1886a), Zintgra¤ (1895), to name but a few. The knowledge most Germans had of English, to a

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

291

greater or lesser extent, had obviously influenced their understanding and also ‘misunderstanding’ of Pidgin, its grammar and vocabulary. The Germans were supported in their work in factories, in coastal travel, and in explorations by the Kru boy workers who helped to spread and strengthen the kind of Pidgin they heard from the Germans and mixed it with the Pidgin spoken in Liberia. Krio, the Creole spoken in Sierra Leone, had a strong impact on CPE. Some divergences between CPE and Krio, however, seem to be the result of German influence on CPE. The Germans were responsible for spreading CPE from the coast to the hinterland. It is probable that a German-influenced pronunciation became the norm for many Cameroonians learning Pidgin. It was under German administration that CPE was first written down. Since German orthography was considered more flexible in the adaptation of sound changes than English orthography, it was thus used to represent CPE sounds. The comprehensive document by Gu¨nther von Hagen (1908) was in fact composed according to natives’ pronunciation though as perceived by German ears. The Germans probably left several Germanisms in the way they wrote the language. Many similarities can be observed between CPE and German sounds and, since German is only one stratum among several, a reinforcement e¤ect can most certainly be assumed.

References Alleyne, Mervyn C. 1980. Comparative Afro-American. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers. Anon. 1880. Der Kruboy als Arbeiter und seine Geschichte. Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 411–412. Anon. 1910. Kamerun und die deutsche Sprache. Deutsches Kolonialblatt. 439. Anon. 1913. Zur Sprachenfrage in Kamerun. Kamerun-Post: Unabha¨ngiges und einziges Organ fu¨r die wirtschaftlichen Interessen der deutschen Schutzgebiete Kamerun und Togo. Douala, 12. Ma¨rz. Bates-Mims, Merelyn B. 1986. ‘Chez les Noirs’: A Comparative-Historical Analysis of Pidgin and Creole languages: Cameroon Pidgin and Louisiana Creole English. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cincinnati. Buchner, Max. 1886a. Kamerun-Englisch. Beilage zur Allgemeinen Zeitung Nr. 318: 16. November. 4683–4684. ¨ ber den Umgang mit Negern. Deutsche Kolonialzeitung. Buchner, Max. 1886b. U Berlin. 220–221. Buchner, Max. 1914. Aurora Colonialis. Bruchstu¨cke eines Tagebuchs aus dem ersten Beginn unserer Kolonialpolitik 1884/85. Mu¨nchen: Piloty and Loehle.

292

Brigitte Weber

De Lancey, Mark W. and H. Mbella Mokeba. 1990. Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Cameroon. London: Scarecrow Press. Dwyer, David. 1966. An Introduction to West African Pidgin English. Michigan State University: African Studies Center. Echu, George. 2004. The language question in Cameroon. Linguistik Online 18(1): 19–33. www.linguistik-online.de/18_04/index.html. Accessed 5 October 2006. Eckart, Wolfgang U. 1997. Medizin und Kolonialimperialismus: Deutschland 1884– 1945. Paderborn: Scho¨ningh. Encyclopaedia Britannica online. http://www.britannica.com. Accessed 5 December 2008. Fe´ral, Carole de. 1989. Pidgin-English du Cameroun: Description Linguistique et Sociolinguistique. Paris: Peters/SELAF. Friederici, Georg. 1911. Pidgin-Englisch in Deutsch-Neu-Guinea. Koloniale Rundschau 1911: 92–106. Fyle, Cli¤ord N. and Eldred D. Jones. 1980. A Krio-English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gilbert, Glenn G. 1985. Hugo Schuchardt and the Atlantic Creoles: A newly discovered manuscript ‘On the negro English of West Africa’. American Speech 60: 31–63. Gilman, Charles. 1972. The Comparative Structure in French, English, and Cameroonian Pidgin English: An Exercise in Linguistic Comparison. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Northwestern University, Illinois. University microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Gilman, Charles. 1979. Cameroonian Pidgin English: A neo-African language. In: Hancock, Ian F. (ed.), Readings in Creole Studies. Ghent: E. Story-Scientia. 269–280. Grade, Paul. 1889. Bemerkungen u¨ber das Negerenglisch an der Westku¨ste von Afrika. Archiv fu¨r das Studium der neueren Sprachen 83: 261–272. Grade, Paul. 1892. Das Negerenglisch an der Westku¨ste von Afrika. Anglia – Zeitschrift fu¨r Englische Philologie 14: 362–393. ¨ lsucher von Duala: Ein afrikanisches Tagebuch. Mu¨nchen: Grimm, Hans. 1933. Der O Albert Langen-Georg Mu¨ller Verlag. Hagen, Gunther von. 1908. Kurzes Handbuch fu¨r Neger-Englisch an der Westku¨ste Afrikas unter besonderer Beru¨cksichtigung von Kamerun. Berlin: Dingeldey & Werres. Hancock, Ian F. 1971. West Africa and the Atlantic Creoles. In: Spencer W., John (ed.), The English Language in West Africa. London: Longman. 113–122. Hausen, Karin. 1970. Deutsche Kolonialherrschaft in Afrika: Wirtschaftsinteressen und Kolonialverwaltung in Kamerun vor 1914. Freiburg: Atlantis Verlag. Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huber, Magnus. 1999. Ghanaian Pidgin English in its West African Context: A Sociohistorical and Structural Analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Hutter, Franz. 1902. Wanderungen und Forschungen im Nord-Hinterland von Kamerun. Braunschweig: F. Vieweg & Son.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

293

Kluge, Friedrich. 1989. Etymologisches Wo¨rterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Ko¨nig, Ekkehard and Volker Gast. 2007. Understanding English-German Contrasts. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag. Koloniale Rundschau. Bd. 1911, 1913. Zeitschrift fu¨r koloniale La¨nder-, Vo¨lker- u. Staatenkunde. Berlin: Reimer. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2001. Pidgin English facing death in Cameroon. Langscape 21:11–22. www.terralingua.org/publications/Langscape/LS21.pdf. Accessed 20 January 2008. Kouega, Jean Paul. 2008. A Dictionary of Cameroon Pidgin English Usage: Pronunciation, Grammar and Vocabulary. Munich: LINCOM. Le Vine, Victor T. 1971. The Cameroon Federal Republic. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Mansfeld, Dr. Alfred. 1908. Urwald-Dokumente: Vier Jahre unter den Crossflussnegern Kameruns. Berlin: D. Reimer. Mansfeld, Dr. Alfred. 1924. Westafrika: Urwald- und Steppenbilder. Berlin: AurigaVerlag. Markey, Thomas (ed. and transl.). 1979. Hugo Schuchardt: The Ethnography of Variation: Selected Writings on Pidgins and Creoles. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1973. English in Cameroon. A Study in Historical Contacts, Patterns of Usage and Current Trends. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Mbassi-Manga, Francis. 1976. The state of contemporary English in Cameroon. In: Mbassi-Manga, Francis (ed.), Cameroon Studies in English and French (CASEF). Victoria: Presbook. 49–63. Mihalic, Francis. 1971. The Jacaranda Dictionary and Grammar of Melanesian Pidgin. Milton, Queensland: The Jacaranda Press. Mu¨hlha¨usler, Peter. 1997. Pidgin & Creole Linguistics. London: University of Westminster Press Ngome, Manasseh. 1982. Cameroon Pidgin English Vocabulary: A LexicoSemantic Study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Yaounde. Oxford English Dictionary. 2006. Oxford: Oxford University press. Online Etymology Dictionary. http://www.etymonline.com. Accessed 5 December 2008. Pinsker, Hans Ernst. 1974. Historische Englische Grammatik. Mu¨nchen: Hueber. Raaflaub, Fritz. 1948. Die Schulen der Basler Mission in Kamerun, ihre Geschichte und Gegenwartsaufgabe. Basler Missionsbuchhandlung Luzern: Bucher AG. Romaine, Suzanne. 1992. Language, Education, and Development: Urban and Rural Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rudin, Harry R. 1938. Germans in the Cameroons 1884–1914. A Case Study in Modern Imperialism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Sala, Bonaventure M. and Aloysius Ngefac. 2006. What’s happening to Cameroon Pidgin? The Depidginisation Process in Cameroon Pidgin English. PhiN 36:31– 43. http://web.fu-berlin.de/phin/phin36/p36i.htm. Accessed 1 December 2007.

294

Brigitte Weber

Schneider, Gilbert D. 1966. West-African Pidgin-English: A Descriptive Linguistic Analysis with Texts and Glossary from the Cameroon Area. Doctoral thesis. Hartford Seminary Foundation. Schro¨der, Anne. 2003. Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tu¨bingen: Gunter Narr. Spreekworden in Pidgin. Language exercises for Pidgin under the supervision of the Mill Hill Fathers. The Bible Society of Cameroon. 2000. Gud Nyus fo ol Pipul: Nyu Testament fo Pidgin. Yaounde. Todd, Loreto. 1969. Pidgin English of West Cameroon. Belfast: Queen’s University. Todd, Loreto. 1979. Cameroonian: A consideration of ‘What’s in a Name?’ In: Hancock, Ian F. (ed.), Readings in Creole Studies. Ghent: E. Story-Scientia. 281–294. Todd, Loreto. 1984. Modern Englishes: Pidgins and Creoles. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Todd, Loreto. 1991. Talk Pidgin: A Structured Course in West African Pidgin English. Leeds: Tortoise Books. Wahrig, Gerhard. 1986. Deutsches Wo¨rterbuch. Gu¨tersloh: Bertelsmann Lexikon Verlag. Weber, Brigitte. 2008. Cameroon Pidgin English: A Study of the Language and an Analysis of the Influences from German. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Alpen-Adria-Universita¨t Klagenfurt. Weinreich, Uriel. 1953. Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg. 2001. English in Cameroon. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Michaela. 1993. Hugo Schuchardt Nachlaß: Schlu¨ssel zum Nachlaß des Linguisten und Romanisten Hugo Schuchardt (1842–1927). Graz: Leykam. Zintgra¤, Eugen. 1895. Nord-Kamerun: Schilderung der im Auftrage des Auswa¨rtigen Amtes zur Erschliessung des no¨rdlichen Hinterlandes von Kamerun wa¨hrend der Jahre 1886–1892 unternommenen Reisen. Berlin.

German colonial influences on Cameroon Pidgin English

295

Appendix I. One page of Hagen’s Kurzes Handbuch fu¨r Negerenglisch (section IV, 1908: 58)

296

Brigitte Weber

Appendix II. Letter in ‘Ku¨stendeutsch’ (Zintgra¤ 1895: 59)

Part III. Texts and more texts

Signboard on a street in Dschang, Cameroon

Written and oral samples of Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English Compiled by Eric A. Anchimbe 1. Written Cameroon English text Source: The Post newspaper: No. 003/2009 of Monday, 02 March 2009. Available at www.postnewsline.com/2009/03/scammer-slammed-2year-jailterm.html#more. Accessed 2 April 2009. Scammer Slammed 2-Year Jail Term By Elvis Tah An internet scammer, Roland Obi Ayuk, who was nabbed by elements of the Buea Judicial Police, has been sentenced to two years imprisonment, and to pay a fine of FCFA 800.000. Ayuk: Can now take a cold coke in jail [caption of picture of Ayuk]

The Presiding Magistrate, Justice Patience Mbuagbaw Tanyi, pronounced the judgment recently at the Buea Magistrate Court. Ayuk, 29, was arrested on Saturday, November 22, at the Mutengene COFINES money agency, during his third attempt to hoodwink a Canadian, Harold Ewert of some millions. The scammer, who is reported to have been milking fat from scamming, for the past two years, purported to be a philanthropist who was helping some destitute pygmies in the East Region of Cameroon. He is alleged to have defrauded his victims of several millions of FCFA, using the pseudonym, ‘‘Nelly Haddisson Besong, of a charitable organisation in Cameroon.’’ Ayuk reportedly defrauded Ewert of FCFA 4 million and was about to get the third booty when the police clamped on him. He had reportedly collected the money in two instalments; FCFA 1.9 million and FCFA 2.1 million. In both instances, when Ayuk collected the money, he used but a driver’s license bearing his fake name. His real name only came to the lime light through a passport that he reportedly produced after his arrest.

300

Eric A. Anchimbe

Going by the Canadian, he met Ayuk on a Christian website where he (Ayuk) presented himself as a female medical doctor who was in the process of immigrating to Canada but was short of finance because she had donated some of her savings to a water project for the Pygmies. It was after the Canadian suspected some foul games that he alerted the Cameroon judicial police to investigate the matter. The Southwest Regional Chief of Judicial Police, Peter Diangha Adjo¤oin, and Assistant Chief of Service for Financial and Economic Investigation, Solomon Dibongue Ebwea, arrested the suspect while he tried to collect money from the same agency. He was detained at the Buea Central Police Station, where he was helping the police with information about his activities. Following the publication of this story on our website some months ago, we got a reaction from the said Roland Obi Ayuk, claiming that he was out of jail and was as free as a bird. He declared that he was ‘‘donning a grey suit and a lemon shirt and qua‰ng a cold bottle of Cocacola’’. Ayuk’s reaction reads in parts: ‘‘Great Story . . . The Post. It’s no news that The Post is quick to stories like this, so they can caption and sell . . . Contrary to Mr. Bongo who thinks Ayuk should be rotting in jail, I am right here responding to this piece. In fact, I have a cold bottle of Cocacola. It’s unfortunate that every scene that has to do with a white man and a black man, in which dollars were exchanged is quickly called a scam. But its even unfortunate that under qualified Papers like The Post are quick to print stories like these without proper investigations.’’ The scammer even went further in his attempt to debunk the claims, but insinuated that he wanted to bribe his way out but failed woefully in the attempt. (See The Post of Friday November 28, 2008). Comments Ayuk: ‘‘Can now take a cold coke in jail’’ . . . a report or revenge? Lets get our personal resentments o¤ news reports or better call it an opinion rather than a news report. Posted by: hills | Monday, 02 March 2009 at 09:01 AM Absolutely ridiculous! ‘‘Ayuk: Can now take a cold coke in jail’’ (The Post Newsline). So is this a personal victory for The Post? I am neither condoning nor condemning Ayuk, but I don’t understand why the post is celebrating this one. Posted by: Pride | Monday, 02 March 2009 at 10:35 AM

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

301

No, there’s no cold coke for you in jail Mr Ayuk. But there will be plenty of sex for you! Enjoy the fruits of your labour. Most likely related to that Enow Brillian Ayuk from Kembong. Posted by: Glenn Wilson | Monday, 02 March 2009 at 09:21 PM By plenty of sex, you mean anal and or oral, right? How have you ascertained this fact. Thought gay stu¤ is illegal in Cameroon. Hey Wilson, can you go a bit futher. . . , How is it done, again is it done only in prison, have you done it with Ayuk before or he did it with you. Anyway yr biz. Posted by: hills | Monday, 02 March 2009 at 11:54 PM You are very curious, Hills. Perhaps you should do your own research, but I feel that your questions are rhetorical and you know all on this subject. As for what is legal and illegal in Cameroon, that is decided with money and intimidation. Posted by: Glenn Wilson | Tuesday, 03 March 2009 at 07:46 PM This Glenn Wilson character is quite hilarious. You came to Cameroon to continue the tradition of the white man: shady dealings, exhortion [sic] and exploitation. Fortunately, reality slapped you on the face and you soon realized that this wasn’t the colonial era. Ever since, you jump around this forum throwing insults here and there. Africa is not a game Glenn Wilson and to borrow the words of Idi Amin, whatever happened to you in Africa was probably the realest moments of your life. Posted by: United states of Africa | Tuesday, 03 March 2009 at 09:30 PM Mr. Glenn Allen. Are you going to spend your entire life blaming Cameroon for your failure? As mush as Cameroon has contributed to your fall, its also your own bad judgement that got you into the situation you are in. You wanted fun and you got as much of it as you deserved. Vindictiveness wouldn’t get you any where. Let it go man! Posted by: NTEB | Wednesday, 04 March 2009 at 08:15 AM The Name Glenn Wilson look fake to me. What the hell do need from our Pygmies. go help your desperate whities. . . Posted by: Ron | Wednesday, 04 March 2009 at 06:32 PM Yeah Glenn fake, Rhetorical questions for a rhetoric opinion. You got served on your own plate. . ..hahaha you made the call, I just followed along. Where are you coming from, what happened to you poor Glenn, If legality is restricted to money and intimidation, then to what extend do you justify your adversaries predicaments. There you go wrapping in a

302

Eric A. Anchimbe

self created cankerworm. its the path to self-destruction Mr bombastical mooncalf. Posted by: hills | Friday, 06 March 2009 at 09:16 PM You manyu guys are really funny. I make a point about a thief and you go getting all racist as usual. You are just like well-trained pets, I throw the stick and you go chasing after it. hahaha How can anyone take you ghosts seriously? Any point you make is of no value because you aren’t prepared to stand by it. We can all say whatever we want anonymously, but if you trust yourself and your values then you would identify yourself. You are probably the types of people that I watched in the SW courts as you frustrated and stole from your own family? For your information, I have even less time for thieves with white skin. Now you can go back to your bottle of music [mu¨tzig]. Posted by: Glenn Wilson | Friday, 06 March 2009 at 09:41 PM Your pointy was rhetoric . . . full stop, keep your mouth zip and opinions concealed to your little stereotype box or better still refer to your school notes (if you were ever schooled) before jumping on an issue that can eat you up. Here you speak ‘‘As for what is legal and illegal in Cameroon, that is decided with money and intimidation.’’ ‘‘Any point you make is of no value because you aren’t prepared to stand by it.’’ Check those two out and see how contradictory your opinions are. Tell me, how far are you prepared to stand by the fact that ‘‘what is legal and illegal in Cameroon is decided with money and intimidation.’’ Again, check this out ‘‘I make a point about a thief and you go getting all racist as usual.’’ You talk about racism, yet you single out Cameroon as being lawless, and your country lawful . . . No need to refer your tiny brain to statistics and facts. Last but not the least, a thief you say, oh! you mean a criminal. . . . if the former is really what you intended to say, then you are pathetic and need not be granted any form of asylum anywhere. An apology to this forum will do you some good, Mr Glenne. Posted by: hills | Friday, 06 March 2009 at 11:49 PM Hills, respect. I’m not sure if you followed the Glenn story and even if it turned out to be a tale for entertainment, I would personally sympathize with the character ‘Glenn Wilson’. This guy was actually disposessed o¤ his little fortune by a Manyu sister, now if you put the color or tribe first, I’ll also release bomb shells against the ‘whitemen, responsible for all our troubles’. But if we treat this gentleman as another human, who was shortsighted then we have a di¤erent set of arguments for or against. Well again

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

303

we can start from the basics, this Glenn person, reportedly su¤ered an injustice and couldn’t find justice in our courts which we all know how it works and he uses such medium to shed his tears and I hardly see how he deserves the negative titles. As for Obi, he will be lucky to comment on the Post again in 2011. Posted by: Mbu.B | Saturday, 07 March 2009 at 02:32 AM It is surprising that anyone who want to denigrate a man of integrity like Glenn Wilson. From his ordeal in Cameroon and the steadfastness and restrained he shown, any responsible mind would understand that he is a very kindhearted, loving and Godfearing person. Please Hills, show respect for this man as he is not the type you guys want to depict above. Posted by: rexon | Saturday, 07 March 2009 at 04:52 PM

2. Oral Cameroon English text Source: Excerpts of an interview conducted by Eric A. Anchimbe in Bamenda in September 2009 with a male teacher (38 years old) and a female journalist (27 years old). Q: Male:

Q: Male: Q:

Did you have any situations where you were o¤ered and you were not in the position to accept? Ya, that’s true. I’ve had situations not only one. I’ve had situations where people o¤er presents to me that I may not be able to consume. . . And I find it very di‰cult to turn down the o¤er because sometimes somebody may be thinking that you turned down the o¤er because you don’t like him or her. But ehm, I will take the situation of o¤ering me maybe drinks in the bar. You may o¤er a drink to me when I have already taken some and I may not be able to continue because you might have come and met me already consuming. And since I couldn’t take above my level, I will rather plead with you that if you could keep it, I will drop by some other time to take it, if it wouldn’t bother you. Then in the, sometimes. . . Can you remember any particular incident in which such a thing happened? Ya, I have had incidents eh that eh somebody met me in the bar, o¤ered a beer, eh Who was the person?

304 Male:

Eric A. Anchimbe

Haha, well eh it was an authority of the province or of the region, and. . . . Q: Someone socially and administratively higher than you. Male: Good, higher than me and a boss to me. And unfortunately I had already taken more than I could take again. So I only ehh politely informed him that I may stop by some other time and take. But he wanted us to be together so that ehh we take. And then we had now to take another appointment. That was the only polite way I could, you know, turn down the o¤er. Q: Did he insist when you said you can’t drink anymore? Male: No, he was an educated person. And it didn’t bother him so much. The only regret was that I was leaving while he was still there. However, he came and met me and I had to leave before him. Q: You said ‘educated person’, do you think an uneducated person will take it di¤erently? Male: Eh Sometimes but not all. Some people when they o¤er maybe what you do not even consume. For example, I may not be consuming Guinness, I come and I meet somebody and he gives me the honour to give me his glass to share and if that is not even my brand and I say I will not be able to consume. The person keeps insisting that ‘‘no, drink, I am the one giving’’, and will not even bother if you do take alcohol or not. [. . .] Female: I think ehh when we talk of turning down an o¤er, a present being o¤ered to you by somebody who cares or whom you love or you know, an o‰cial that you meet trying to show gratitude for something. For a moment you don’t want that gift. There are many polite ways to say that but some people depending on their upbring[ing], they tend to ehhh it depends on each and every individuals; they have their own manner of taking that your turning, you turned down of their o¤er. They might take it that you are afraid of them that they might poison you or you’ve heard stories about them and they wouldn’t be expecting you to say that. For example, I, there is a case where, eh, I had a cousin, he is of late. Q: Was he older than you? Female: Yes, [. . .] So we went visiting to one of our aunts’ place, and they proposed a meal. They o¤ered us a meal, I ate but my cousin didn’t eat. I alone knew what was happening because, you know,

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

305

there are certain situations in life where when you are sick you shouldn’t tell everyone about your ailment because people will take that as an opportunity to cause harm or give insult on you, leave insults on you. So the aunt took it very badly. Q: That he refused to eat Female: That he refused to eat her food after a long time, you know, added to the fact that he’s been away for so long. ‘‘How can he come and refuse my meal’’. Being something eh fishy to my aunt, and so we couldn’t explain, we just said, I just said ‘‘Aunty I ate your food, it is very important. At least, one party has eaten the food. Before we left the house, he had eaten, he had eaten so, I had not eaten so I was very hungry, famished and was eating your food. I have eaten, he has eaten’’, so she shouldn’t be that eh angry about the whole thing. Q: But the aunt didn’t want to understand. Female: She didn’t want to understand. May be it was a matter of age, who knows? Q: Upbringing and culture, what does the culture say? Female: You know, the culture ehhh I don’t think I know so much about the culture but as I would say ehhh, what can I say, common sense. It’s like there is this respect that you should have for your culture. And when you get to your village, if an elderly person o¤ers you something, you’re not forced to, if you accept it, you are not forced to consume that thing at that very moment, you know. You can accept it and just say you will take it home, that you will consume it later on. And you take it home. If you don’t want it you can give it to another person or just keep it. Most often, things we do accept is this eehh durable items. If your grandfather or your grand uncle gives you a calabash in the village and you are going to the city, you won’t turn down that o¤er; you take it. The only thing: if you’ve heard these talks, evil talks about your grand uncle, just take it. Be, have a prayerful mind, you take it and you pray over it. If you are keeping it, then you keep, if you are not keeping it get disposed of it but don’t make her, don’t make he or she know that you have this protective attitude towards him. Q: So the culture says you should normally accept. Male: Well, there are some cultures that normally say you should accept, like when you go for knock doors, you find kolanuts. They share the kolanuts to everybody whether you do eat kolanuts

306

Eric A. Anchimbe

or not, you must be forced to take but the best way to turn such kolanuts down is, you can pretend, you take, you behave as if you have thrown the kolanut into your mouth and you keep your mouth busy and you make people happy rather than making people develop wrinkles that you turned down their o¤er. [. . .] Female: At one point in time when I was growing, my dad used to tell us when we had to go for holidays in the village. He says, when we get to the village, we should do everything to keep away from taking things from certain uncles or aunts. We asked: why dad? He said ‘‘just follow what I say. It’s for your own good’’. So when we get to the village, it’s like we sit, we greet. When the uncle or the aunties [say] ‘‘just a moment, I will be right back’’, you know, we get up, we make as if we want to play outside Q: And you run away. Female: We’re gone. Hahahah. We already knew we didn’t know what was going on. When we get back to the city and dad asks ‘‘what did you take from who?’’ and we will say, ‘‘ok, we collected this from grand pa, from grand ma we collected this’’. Mostly grand ma is the one preparing our food in our presence, so, there is no fear about that. Grand pa, why would you be afraid of your grand father? But he says, ‘‘but that is no guarantee. It is not because he is your, my mother or my father that you are not endangered’’. [. . .] Q: Do you have a situation in which someone you didn’t know, a stranger o¤ered you something? May be on the bus? Male: Yes, it is common. We have been travelling and then sometimes somebody will get something and will o¤er, maybe ehhh turn an o¤er to you. But sometimes you may be sleeping, sometimes you are dozing in the car. Sometimes after I take in anything that you need to eat, you equally need to brush your mouth with water and in the absence of water, you may not want to consume. And the person may not be very comfortable. But for me I have been o¤ering and people do refuse too and I will know that they are not in the position of consuming at that time. [. . .] Q: Just tell us one. Male: I remember there was a time I was travelling to Yaounde and there was a kid of about 9 years seated by me. When we got to

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

307

Makenene, I bought plums, fish and plantains including hers. When I came to the car, she refused taking. But for me I thought that she didn’t have the means following her age. Q: When you were buying for her you thought she doesn’t have money. [. . .] Male: Good. So when I got to the car, gave her the o¤er and she told me ‘‘no, thank you uncle, I wouldn’t consume’’. And that is, you know, that is why I keep that thing in the memory up till today because it was looking abnormal to me, for me to find a child from Bamenda to Yaounde seated in the car, she did not even go out. So when I gave her that o¤er, she turned the o¤er down. Q: So, did you feel o¤ended a bit? Male: Ya, a bit. But I couldn’t prove to her that I was o¤ended because she didn’t request for that. Q: In the rest of the trip, did you o¤er her something else? Male: No, I couldn’t have done that. I would have been making myself stupid. Q: Did you think she was proud or being impolite? Male: No. she wasn’t impolite. I want to believe that it was her upbringing. She must have been told at home that, ‘‘if you find somebody you don’t know, don’t accept’’. [. . .] Female: I should think, I have found myself in a situation where I rejected an o¤er. That’s because I was on drugs and I could not consume alcohol. But what I did in return for my gratitude, I o¤ered that person a drink in return. I said, no, we’ll. [. . .] Female: Without accepting, I said, no, we are going to drink on another rendez-vous because now I am really really not eh in the eh sound to consume alcohol. ‘‘What’s wrong?’’. I said, no, there are moments. Everyday is not Christmas. Christmas appears once a year, everyday is Sunday haha, so, this is my Christmas period. I will tell you that I won’t consume it. But I o¤ered a drink to the person and the person didn’t feel o¤ended. By the time you refuse, in a repulsive manner, and then that person will feel very o¤ended. So, all we should tell people is that, you should have this kind and ehm honest, calm way of turning down an o¤er.

308

Eric A. Anchimbe

3. Written Cameroon Pidgin English text 1 (Religion) Source: Gud Nyus fo Ol Pipul (Matthew 7: 1–20). No joj oda pipul ‘‘Meik wuna no di joj oda pipul, an God e no go joj wuna, 2 foseika sei, hau weh wuna joj som man, na so God go joj wuna, an de loh weh wuna di yus-am e go bi de loh weh God go yus-am fo wuna. 3Na hau yu di si som smol deiti fo yua broda yi ai, an yu no di main de plank wei e dei fo yua oun ai? 4An na hau yu fit tok fo yua broda sei, ‘Meik A muv som smol deiti fo yua ai,’ wei som plank e dei fo yua ai? 5Lai-lai man! Fest muv de plank weh e dei fo yua ai, den yu go di si fain fo muv de smol deiti weh e dei fo yua broda yi ai. 6‘‘No teik holy ting bigin giv-am fo dog dem. No truwei wuna musanga dem fo shwan dem, foseika dem go machmach-am, dem ton fo wuna skin fo bait-bait wuna.’’ Ask-am, fain-am, nak-am 7‘‘Ask-am

an wuna go get-am; fain-am an wuna go si-am; nak-am an de doh go open fo wuna, 8 foseika sei eni man weh e ask-am, e go get-am; eni man weh e fain-am, e go si-am; an eni man weh e nak-am, doh go open fo yi. 9Na wich man fo wuna wei yi pikin fit ask yi bred an e go giv yi na stun, 10ou if de pikin fit ask yi fish an e go giv yi na sneik? 11If wuna weh wuna bad so wuna di stil sabi hau fo giv fain ting dem fo wuna pikin dem, no bi wuna Papa fo heven e go giv fain ting dem plenti plenti fo pipul weh dem ask yi? 12‘‘Meik yu do fo oda pipul na de ting weh yu want meik pipul dem du-am fo yu, foseika dis wan na de loh an weiti weh de profet dem di tok.’’ Pas na fo smol doh 13‘‘Wuna

pas na fo smol doh, foseika de doh weh e big an de rout weh e no had e di go na fo pleis weh yu go dai na fo dai, an plenti pipul dem di pas fo dei. 14De doh weh e smol an de rout weh e had e di go fo laif, an pipul weh dem di pas fo dei dem no plenti’’. Tri witi yi frut 15‘‘Wuna

lukot foseika de lai-lai profet dem. Tam weh dem di kam, dem di luk lek na fain shiip, bot fo insaid dem bi na bad bad bush dog dem. 16Dem fashon go meik wuna fo sabi dem. Chuku-chuku tri e no fit bea vain-frut, an bush tri e no fit bea fig-frut. 17Eni fain tri e di bea fain frut, an eni wowo tri di bea bad frut. 18Som fain tri e no fit bea bad frut, an som wowo tri e no fit bea fain frut. 19De man weh e get fam go kot de

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

tri weh e no fit bea fain frut e truwei-am fo faya. fashon go meik wuna fo sabi dem.’’

20So

309

lai-lai profet dem

4. Written Cameroon Pidgin English text 2 (Literature – poetry) Source: Majunga Tok: Poems in Pidgin English. (Vakuntah 2008: 2) Wata Pass Garri Ma Broda, Wata done pass garri for Ongolah-oh! Pipo dem de daso die like fly. Dem say na 7 þ 1 de tut dem go, Na helele-oh! Ma Sista, Wata done pass garri for upkontry-oh! Pipo dem de daso die like cockroach. Dem say melecine done finish For hospita, Na helele-oh! Ma Kombi, Wata done pass garri for Ambasonia-oh! Pipo dem de daso die like fish. Wey dem throway’am poison, Dem say dem no get fain diba for drink, Politik pipo done auction SNEC for mukala pipo. Ma Man, Kelen-kelen de for Abakwa-oh, Pipo for gomna dem done tif all moni Go put’am for bank for Switzerland. Na helele-oh! Na some ma frog complice Be tok say: on va faire comment?

5. Oral Cameroon Pidgin English text Source: Excerpts of transcripts of the programme, ‘‘E Fine for Sabi’’ (It is Good to Know), on Radio Bamenda. Host: Grace Che. Guest: Mamy Phoebe. (Saturday, 22 August 2009)

310

Eric A. Anchimbe

Grace Che: Dear listeners, I di salute wuna. Na another day for CRTV Bamenda and the programme ‘E fine for sabi’ weh we di bring-am for wuna this morning. My guest na wuna mamy weh e di always come talk for wuna here, Mamy Phoebe. And today we go di look about the kidney weh na one of the complications of diabetes. But before we go for the tori proper, I want sey make yi salute wuna. Mamy Phoebe: Good morning ma brothers and sisters. How wuna dey? I hope sey the lectures weh we be repeat-am last week about how you get for take care of your foot, we no be do-am so because of mistake, we be di do-am because that foot palaver na serious matter and we be want say make wuna hear-am fine, so that tomorrow when you want go into problems make you no talk say you no be understand because we be pass-am only one time. We be deliberately want for pass-am many times so that any person weh e hear, whether you get diabetes or not, taking care of your feet na a priority. Grace Che: And so today, dear listeners, na for kidney plaba we go toucham today weh e di come as a result of diabetes for some cases. Mamy Phoebe: Yes, kidney problem na one of the complications weh we di get-am for diabetes and once you don get this kidney problem, it be very di‰cult for manage-am. And so today I be think say make we look at our kidneys. Diabetes and hypertension, them be among the leading causes of chronic kidney disease and we want for thank AES-SONEL say them be do some quick, how them di call-am?, them be test some people free of charge last Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. And we be discover-am say plenty people them get diabetes and hypertension and serious hypertension weh them no know. And so when them get this serious hypertension weh them no know and they get diabetes weh them no know, by the time weh them go want reach for hospital their kidneys them don be damaged. And so na yi weh we be try for look into all those things them weh we be see-am last time, we say ‘no’ we never ever talk about kidneys, so make we try for talk about ‘‘are your kidneys ok?, your kidneys them be ok?’’ That na the topic for today. It fine say when we go for hospital, make we ask we doctors for check we kidneys. And the earlier you do that one the better because sometimes when you go for clinic or for see your doctor them di hurriedly do only your blood sugar, then them check your blood pressure. Them no di get time for check say your kidneys them be fine and by the time weh them want check these kidneys, plenty damage e don be done. So I know say when you ask your doctor say make yi check your kidneys, yi di

Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English

311

know exactly the type of test weh yi di do-am. But I want for beg we doctors them say when the patients them say ‘‘I don hear them di talk something for radio say make, when I go hospital, because I get diabetes and high blood, make them check my kidney. Make doctor no talk or make nurse no talk say ‘‘na you get for tell me weti for do. When doctor or nurse talk, na you go talk?’’. You know we don educate these patients for way weh them suppose for know weti weh them get for do and we health people, we just suppose for di help them, we no get for hala them. I mean sometimes the way weh them go take-am talk, it fi be the way weh you fi vex, but then when we be out there, if we di get a salary we di get that salary because we be na servants for these patients. And if the patients are not there, we cannot have a salary and therefore time weh I be di graduate for university we be get a combined graduation where the dean of the faculty of biomedical sciences, that is 1991, yi be talk say doctors them be next to God. And then, I mean, many people them begin wonder why yi talk so. If doctors them be next to God, God e be bi person weh e be di heal and so therefore them don empower, God don give yi own small way say make we heal. And when these patients them come, we get, God no be di heal with harshness. God e be di heal with love and patience and empathy. And so when I see some of us, we di halla patient, especially a patient in agony. We say ‘‘when doctor don talk, who be you for talk. When nurse don talk who be you to talk’’. Make we remember the oath weh we be take-am. We know say these patients them weh na chronic patients, those with kidney problems, diabetes and hypertension, we get for handle them with care. Them be very irritating but we should learn to live with their way because when them dey in severe pain, some other thing no dey other than to be harsh to us and we get to do our duty of caring for them in love. And it is only there that God go bless we work and we go work fine. Grace Che: Yes country people na CRTV Bamenda this and wuna di listen for the programme ‘E fine for sabi’. And we go move now for see say weti be function for kidney. Weti kidney di do for man yi skin? Mamy Phoebe: Yes. We get two kidneys and then them be located at the centre of we back. Grace Che: Na that thing we e dey like groundnut. Mamy Phoebe: No yi no dey like groundnut. It dey like bean shape. Wuna know beans weh we di chop-am for market, that big beans weh e curve. And it dey like kidney shape. I mean kidney dish shape,

312

Eric A. Anchimbe

people them weh them don go for hospital. And then one of the main functions of the kidneys na for filter all that waste products; all thing weh we di chop-am. [. . .] Grace Che: And so my dear sisters, country people, wuna don hear weti weh sister don talk concerning the functions of we kidneys for we body. And so it be proper for you when you go hospital, when you know say you don be na that person weh you don get diabetes, try talk for doctor say ‘‘doctor, I want check my kidney’’. Mamy Phoebe: Yes, because at a later stage for chronic kidney disease, weti weh we di call-am say CKD, you go see say some patient them, when them come them di weak plenty and then you di want test them you see say blood e don start short, and then everyday when them want do small small work them di get tired very quick and then sometimes, you know with their hypertension, when them don waka small you want see them don be very tired. And early kidney disease however, it no di show yi for person, like how weh some person go come talk say my kidney them di pain; kidney them no di pain, you no fi see kidney through, I mean, you no fi know say person get kidney problem through pains. [. . .] Grace Che: Apart from diabetes and high blood weh e di cause kidney problems, na which other sick them again fi cause kidney problem? Mamy Phoebe: Well, infection. Some urinary tract infection them fi cause kidney problem them. Drugs. Sometimes you di take plenty drugs like this we sulpurnamite group like our bactrim. You know when you di give bactrim for patient, you di tell yi say, make yi take with plenty of water. Some other antibiotics them dey weh them di destroy, many drugs them dey weh them di destroy kidneys. So when you get for take-am, you get for make sure say your kidneys them dey fine.

Contributors Eric A. Anchimbe teaches English Linguistics at the University of Bayreuth, Germany. He is currently working on a post-doctoral (Habilitation) project on o¤ers and o¤er refusals in postcolonial communities using the postcolonial pragmatics framework he and Dick Janney proposed in the special issue of the Journal of Pragmatics entitled Postcolonial Pragmatics (2011). His other recent publications include Postcolonial Linguistic Voices (edited with S.A. Mforteh, de Gruyter, 2011), Linguistic Identity in Postcolonial Multilingual Spaces (CSP, 2007), and Cameroon English: Authenticity, Ecology and Evolution (Lang, 2006). Among his research interests are world Englishes, linguistic identity construction, and postcolonial pragmatics. Email: [email protected] Lilian Lem Atanga obtained her PhD in Linguistics from Lancaster University, UK. She is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of African Studies, University of Dschang, Cameroon. She researches on gender and discourse studies focusing particularly on political discourse and gender and identity politics. Among her publications are Gender, Discourse and Power in the Cameroonian Parliament (Langaa, 2009) and ‘‘Gendered di¤erences in parliamentary talk in the Cameroonian parliament’’ (Language and Politics in Africa, ed. D.O. Orwenjo and J.O. Ogone: CSP, 2010). She has also done some work on communicating medicine. Email: [email protected] Gratien G. Atindogbe´ is Lecturer of Linguistics at the University of Buea, Cameroon. He obtained a PhD in African Linguistics from the University of Bayreuth, Germany in 1996. Apart from phonology, his specialty, he teaches courses in the area of language planning and language acquisition. His research interests cover descriptive linguistics, documentation of endangered languages, historical linguistics (Bantu), tonology, Cameroon Pidgin English, intercultural communication and the sociolinguistics of the French language. He has published on the indigenisation of French in Cameroon. He is presently project leader in the documentation of two endangered languages of Cameroon, funded by the Volkswagen Foundation. Email: [email protected]

314

Contributors

Evelyn Fogwe Chibaka (PhD) is a lecturer in Linguistics at the University of Buea, Cameroon. Her major research interests include aspects of Bantu syntax, sociolinguistics and language documentation. She has published widely in these fields both in local and international scientific journals. Her current research focuses on aspects of the grammar of Cameroon Pidgin English. Email: [email protected] Kelen Ernesta Fonyuy is a doctoral student in English Linguistics at the University of Bayreuth, Germany, where she also works as a teaching and research assistant. Her research interests cover the fields of sociolinguistics, sociophonetics, contact linguistics, applied linguistics, variation linguistics, peace linguistics, ethnic Englishes, and less dominant varieties of English. Her recent article ‘‘The rush for English education in urban Cameroon: sociolinguistic implications and prospects’’ appeared in English Today (2010). Email: [email protected] Susanne Mu¨hleisen is Professor of English Linguistics at the University of Bayreuth, Germany. Her research interests include varieties of English and contact varieties in Caribbean and African contexts, intercultural pragmatics, English word-formation and translation studies. She is the author of Creole Discourse. Exploring Prestige Formation and Change in Caribbean English-lexicon Creoles (Benjamins, 2002), Heterogeneity in Word-formation Patterns (Benjamins, 2010) and editor/co-editor of Creole Languages in Creole Literatures (JPCL special issue, 2005), Politeness and Face in Caribbean Creoles (Benjamins, 2005), and Linguistic Explorations of Gender and Sexuality (Sargasso special issue, 2009/10). Email: [email protected] Daniel A. Nkemleke is an Associate Professor in English Language and Linguistics at the Ecole Normale Supe´rieure, University of Yaounde I, Cameroon. He teaches ELT courses, functional grammar, academic writing and corpus linguistics. His publications in major international journals cover a range of topics in these areas. His recent book, Exploring Academic Writing in Cameroon English: A Corpus-based Perspective (Cuvillier Verlag, 2011), highlights some of these major research interests. He is an Alexander-von-Humboldt and Fulbright scholar, and director of the Corpus of Cameroon English that is compiled in collaboration with the English Department at Chemnitz University, Germany. Email: [email protected]

Contributors

315

Bonaventure M. Sala is a Senior Lecturer in English Grammar and Stylistics in the English Department at the University of Yaounde I, Cameroon. He holds a PhD in English Grammar from the same university and is interested in the syntactic description of the New Englishes, with special focus on Cameroon English and Cameroon Pidgin English. He is co-author, with Paul N. Mbangwana, of Cameroon English Morphology and Syntax: Current Trends in Action (Lincom, 2009). His scholarly articles have appeared in international journals like English World-Wide, English Today, Alize´s, PhiN and World Englishes. Email: [email protected] Anne Schro¨der is Professor of English Linguistics at Bielefeld University, Germany. She studied English and French at the universities of Caen, France, Bristol, UK and Freiburg i. Br., Germany, where she received her PhD in English Linguistics. She previously worked at Martin Luther University Halle and at Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany. Her publications include Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon (Gunter Narr, 2003), the edition of Crossing Borders: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Africa (LIT, 2004), and various articles on similar topics. She has also researched and published on morphological productivity. Email: [email protected] Augustin Simo Bobda is Professor of English Language and Linguistics at the Advanced School of Education (Ecole Normale Supe´rieure) of the University of Yaounde I, Cameroon. His areas of interest include various aspects of theoretical and applied linguistics, phonology, sociolinguistics, ELT, English usage, and World Englishes. He has held many research and teaching positions in Africa, Europe, America and Asia, including a one-semester visiting professorship in the School of English of the University of Hong Kong for several years. Email: [email protected] Brigitte Weber obtained her PhD from the Alpen Adria Universita¨t Klagenfurt, Austria, in 2008. Her thesis focused on the historical influence of German on Cameroon Pidgin English, especially during German colonisation of Cameroon. She revisits this theme in her recent publication: ‘‘Deutsch-Kamerun: Einblicke in die sprachlische Situation der Kolonie und den deutschen Einfluss auf das Kameruner Pidgin Englisch’’ in Kolonialzeitliche Sprachforschung (ed. Thomas Stolz et al, 2011: Akademie

316

Contributors

Verlag). Her current research is on place names in Cameroon during German colonial rule. Among her future research projects is an analysis of ‘Italian Pidgin’ in Asmara, Eritrea. Email: [email protected] Hans-Georg Wolf is Chair Professor for Development and Variation of the English Language at Potsdam University, Germany. Before his assignment there, he worked at The University of Hong Kong and HumboldtUniversity Berlin. His research interests include sociolinguistics, cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, pragmatics, colonial language policy, and lexicography. He has published widely; his most recent books are A Dictionary of Hong Kong English: Words from the Fragrant Harbor (HKU Press, 2011, with Patrick J. Cummings), and World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach (Mouton de Gruyter, 2009, with Frank Polzenhagen). Email: [email protected]

Author index Adegbija, Efurosibina 66, 131 Alobwede, d’Epie C. 12, 101, 215–217 Anchimbe, Eric A. 5–9, 63, 66, 100– 101, 119, 128, 141, 148, 161 Atechi, Samuel N. 5, 8, 63 Ayafor, Miriam 11–12, 165, 168–170, 180, 186, 197, 216, 220, 228–230, 232, 238–239, 256 Bakker, Peter 192–195, 199, 209, 212 Bamgbose, Ayo 99, 134–135 Bellama, David et al. 11, 166, 168, 170, 184–186 Biber, Douglas, et al. 29–31, 40, 52, 55 Buchner, Max 275, 280, 287, 289–290 Chumbow, Beban S. 16, 77, 85–86, 118, 217 Coates, Jennifer 30, 33, 37, 35–36, 41, 43–45, 47–48, 50–52 Collins, Peter 30 ¨ sten 165, 171–175, 177–178, Dahl, O 180–182, 184 Dwyer, David 10–12, 166, 169, 180, 184–185, 269 Faraclas, Nicholas 221–222, 239, 241 Fe´ral, Carole de 11, 63, 166, 168, 170, 176, 184, 270, 290 Fonlon, Bernard N. 4, 21 Gilman, Charles 166, 270 Grade, Paul 269, 279, 290 Greenbaum, Sydney 29, 52 Hagen, Gunther von 11–12, 18, 272, 274, 280–285, 291 Hancock, Ian F. 209–210, 272–273 Hermere´n, Lars 30, 41, 52

Huber, Magnus 65, 192, 194, 197, 199, 211, 271–272, 274, 290 Hutter, Franz 285, 287 Johansson, Stig 30, 40 Jowitt, David 58, 96 Kachru, Braj B. 66, 77, 99 Kerkvliet, Arnold 4, 248, 254, 273 Koenig, Edna L. et al. 4, 100, 217 Kouega, Jean-Paul 5, 8, 10, 12, 63, 77, 273–274, 281 Kreidler, Charles W. 80, 83 Krogvig, Inger 30, 40 Leech, Geo¤rey 30, 37, 52 Lefebvre, Claire 165, 192, 209 Lyons, John 32, 35, 42, 57 Mackenzie, Lachlan J. 210, 217 Mansfeld, Alfred 285, 289 Masanga, David W. 4, 7, 77, 104 Mbangwana, Paul N. 4, 7, 11–14, 77, 96, 132, 134–135, 216 Mbassi-Manga, Francis 4, 8, 10, 17, 63, 100, 166–168, 170, 180, 186, 217, 270 Menang, Thaddeus 11, 215–216 Mforteh, Stephen A. 8–9 Mufwene, Salikoko S. 3, 9, 63, 118, 130–131 Mu¨hleisen, Susanne 12, 197, 245– 246 Ngefac, Aloysius 7–8, 63, 197, 274 Ngome, Manasse 12, 191, 206, 270, 274 Nkemleke, Daniel 9, 15, 30–31, 39, 41, 58, 63 Ouafeu, Talla Sando Y. 5, 8–9, 63

318

Author index

Palmer, Frank 30, 36, 42, 50, 52, 57 Parkvall, Mikael 192–195, 199, 209, 212 Perkins, Michael 32, 40, 46–47, 56–57 Polzenhagen, Frank 6–7, 64–68, 72, 118–119 Quirk, Randolph 7, 29, 45, 186 Romaine, Suzanne 247, 251–252, 274 Rubach, Jerzy 80, 82 Sala, Bonaventure M. 5, 7–9, 11, 63, 103, 111, 197, 208, 256, 266, 274 Schneider, Edgar W. 9, 99, 118, 137 Schneider, Gilbert 4, 10–12, 166, 169, 171, 180, 184, 197, 217, 222–223, 269 Schro¨der, Anne 10–12, 63, 166, 169– 170, 180, 184, 210, 215–217, 247, 269–270 Sey, Kofi 58, 134–135

Simo Bobda, Augustin 4–6, 9, 13, 41, 63–64, 79–80, 97, 100, 118–119, 132 Song, Priscilla N. 7, 104, 116 Sweetser, Eve 37, 42, 58 Tamanji, Pius 8, 141, 144 Tamfuh, Mushing W. 7, 104, 116 Todd, Loreto 4–8, 10–12, 77, 166– 171, 180, 184–186, 215–217, 223, 225, 233, 239, 248–249, 254–255, 269, 271–274, 287 Wells, John C. 47, 80, 82, 84–85, 107, 114 Winford, Donald 165, 171–172 Wodak, Ruth 145, 152 Wolf, Hans-Georg 5–7, 11, 64–68, 72–73, 100, 118–119, 167 Youssef, Valerie 165, 185 Yuyun, Terrence D. 103, 107

Subject index African English(es) 9, 63–64, 73, 78, 118 East African English 96 South African English 9, 134 West African English 63, 67, 77–78, 97, 121 American English 30, 116, 135 anglophone(s) 8, 14, 101, 117, 142– 143, 146–147, 149–153, 155–158, 160, 168, 217, 248 anglophoneness 160 anglophonism 141 approaches to World Englishes 7 creolistics approach 7 English studies or Anglocentric approach 7 error analysis approach 7, 80 feature analysis approach 7–8 interference approach 7, 78, 117, 136–137, 285 language planning approach 8 lexicographic approach 9, 12, 14, 67, 72–73 pidginisation approach 10, 193 social interaction approach 9, 145, 216 sociolinguistic approach 8, 11 sociology of language approach 8 Bible 197, 244, 260, 263–264, 266 New Testament 12, 19, 191, 245, 255, 264, 266 Bible translation 6, 245–247, 252, 260, 262, 265–266 British English 4, 31, 40, 46, 66, 132, 274 Cameroon 3–9, 11, 13, 39, 58, 67, 70– 71, 85, 99, 101–102, 128, 135, 147, 151, 166, 210, 241, 245, 264– 266, 272, 277

Cameroon English (CamE) 4–6, 29– 30, 37–38, 43–45, 47–48, 52, 55, 63–65, 67, 73, 77–80, 84–96, 102– 108, 111–113, 117–118, 122–124, 130, 210 corpus of Cameroon English (CCE) 30–32, 37–38, 39, 44–46, 49–52, 55–56, 65, 67, 118 linguistic variation 65, 136 phonological features of 63, 101, 105 Cognitive Linguistics 65, 67 Cameroonian parliament 141–143, 153, 159 Cameroon Pidgin English (CPE) 3–5, 10–14, 122, 126, 165–170, 173– 176, 180–184, 186–187, 194–197, 199–204, 207–210, 212, 217, 248– 251, 271–274, 280–284 tense 6, 17, 165–172, 177, 179, 183– 186 aspect 6, 17, 165–172, 179, 183– 186, 187 preverbal marker/preverbal marking 167, 171–173, 176, 179–183, 187 perfect 168–170, 172, 181–182, 184–185 perfective 169–170, 181–184 imperfective 170–171, 175, 177, 187 future 166–167, 169–170, 173–175, 180, 187, 233 habitual 166–170, 177–179, 206, 290 past 166–170, 172, 175–176, 178– 181, 187, 280 Cameroon Pidgin English pronouns 215–217, 220–221, 225, 241 demonstrative pronouns 232–233, 241 emphatic pronouns 222, 230–231

320

Subject index

indefinite pronouns 194, 239–240 interrogative pronouns 194, 234– 235 personal pronouns 218, 221, 223, 225, 241, 254, 257, 279, 282 possessive pronouns 226–227, 282 reciprocal pronouns 215, 240–241 reflexive pronouns 227–228, 230 relative pronouns 238–239 central modals 29–30, 37, 39, 41 tentative forms 37–38, 40 primary forms, 37–38 Cognitive Sociolinguistics 64–65, 73, 118 semantic dimension of 64, 66 common core 64, 66–67, 168 componential-analytic approaches to the lexicon 66 conceptual metaphor theory 64 filter metaphor 63, 119 metaphor 63, 66–67, 70, 117, 120 metaphoric network 66 conceptualisation 64–70, 72–73, 264 cultural conceptualisation 64, 119, 125–126 conceptual network 66, 73 colonialism 3, 11, 137, 152, 248, 269 British colonialism/colonisation 3–4, 99, 248 French colonialism 3, 248 German colonialism/colonial period 6, 9, 248, 271, 277 communal communication 118, 122 communal variety 105, 133 competition and selection hypothesis 9, 118–119, 130 contact language(s) 7, 191–192, 245– 247, 251, 259–260, 265 critical discourse analysis 17, 142 culture-language interface 64, 119 cultural model 65, ancestors 65 corruption 68–73 death 68–73 eating 68–73

family 68–73 gift-giving 68–73 power 68–73 resources 68–73 spirits 68–73 witchcraft 68–73 diphthong simplification 103–104, 107–108 distributive aspect 202, 205–207, 211 dominant discourses 141 DRESS vowel split 109 dynamic model of postcolonial Englishes 9, 118, 137 ecology 5, 9, 63, 117, 119, 122, 127, 136–137 linguistic ecology 137 sociolinguistic ecology 63 ethnic accents of English 7, 101–102, 114 ethnic varieties 100–101, 105 ethnolects of Cameroon English 100, 102 Bafut English 100, 103 Bakossi English 100 Kom English 100, 104 Moghamo English 100, 104 Nso’ English 100, 102–114 Wimbum English 100, 104 epistemic modality 33–35, 52, 55, 57 epistemic adverbials 29, 52–54 epistemic possibility 48–50 logical inference 33, 51 main/modal predication 34, 51 objective epistemic modality 33, 35 subjective epistemic modality 50 filtration processes 6, 9, 117, 119–120, 136–137 attitudinal filtration 102, 119–120, 132–135 linguistic/integrational filtration 16, 119–121 main filter 122–124, 126, 128–131

Subject index secondary filters 122–123, 128 occupational filters 123, 128 regional filter 123–125 social filters 123, 128 untranslatability filter 123, 126–127 francophone(s) 13, 101, 123, 142–143, 146–147, 149–151, 155–157, 159, 161, 176, 188, 247 francophoneness 160 francophonism 141 Ghanaian Pidgin English 192, 274 GOOSE vowel substitution 107, 110, 111 German colony 274, 277, 279, 280, 290 German influence(s) 17, 271, 273–275, 279, 281–282, 291 Germans in Cameroon 274–275, 277, 280 German settlers 272 hypothetical marker 52 identity 119, 128, 135, 141–144, 150, 155–156, 159–160, 260 anglophone identity 142, 147–148, 152, 159 assumed identity 142, 145, 152–153, 160 cultural identity 247, 277 displayed identity 142, 146, 152– 153, 155 ethno-linguistic a‰liation 141, 156 ethnolinguistic identity 8, 156, 160 francophone identity 142, 148–149, 153, 156, 159 imposed identities 142, 145, 152– 153, 157 linguistic identity 8, 13, 133, 135, 141–142, 145, 149, 155, 157, 159, 277 national identity 142–143, 145, 152, 277 negotiable identities 142, 146, 152

321

non-negotiable identity 157, 160 political identities 143, 151, 159 religious identity 153 sociocultural identity 122 identity opportunism 161 idiom 66, 191, 261 indigenisation 264–265 indigenised varieties of English (IVEs) 5, 63, 99, 117, 119, 129– 130, 134, 136 indigenous language(s) 3–4, 8, 100, 122–123, 136–137, 144, 160, 217, 248, 260, 270, 275, 289 input 78, 80, 83, 86–93, 95–97, 114 iterative aspect 203–204, 211 Kamerun 11, 275–276, 286–287 Kamerun-Englisch/KamerunerEnglisch 286–288 Kamerun Stadt 275 Kamtok 12, 165, 169, 210, 242, 255– 256 KIT and LettER vowels 100, 107, 112 Krio 192, 211, 245, 252–253, 256, 272–274, 291 language choice 141–145, 148, 153, 159, 161 language contact 4, 6, 13, 63, 117– 119, 136–137, 216, 259, 269, 271 language elaboration 17–18, 246, 249, 254 language enrichment 246, 259 language policy 141, 271, 290 lexicography 14, 67, 73 linguistic choices 17, 142, 147–148, 151, 160 linguistic victimisation 148 modality 29–30, 32–36, 39, 47, 50, 54–55, 57–59 root/epistemic modality 30, 33, 36– 37, 42–45, 58 modal notions 32 ability 40, 47–48

322

Subject index

adjectives 29, 32, 46–47, 54–55, 57 adverbials 29, 32, 52–53 command/wishes 45 modal lexical verbs/expressions 29, 32, 56–57 necessity 32–33 permission 41, 47–48 possibility 32, 33, 47–48 multilingualism 4, 6 multilingual repertoires 117, 119 multilingual settings/contexts/ societies 9, 11, 15, 100, 136, 145, 147, 151 multilingual speakers 100, 137, 148, 152 nativisation 209–210, 217, 264 nativisation of English 66, 264 Negerenglisch 279–281, 283, 285–287, 295 New English(es) 5–6, 9–10, 11–13, 77–78, 80, 83, 93–96, 100, 118– 120, 264 Nigerian English 63, 80, 85, 97, 131 Nigerian Pidgin English 11, 196, 211, 218, 221–222, 239–241, 266 o‰cial language(s) 3, 101, 127, 129, 141–145, 148, 152, 155, 158–160, 217, 270 orthography 10–12, 246–248, 251, 253, 256, 273, 279, 283, 285 English orthography 252–253, 256– 257, 291 orthographic choices 251 orthographic variation 125, 248– 249, 255 phonemic orthography/spelling 12, 252–256, 266 pidgin orthography 251 Roman alphabet script 256, 272 vowel-graph correspondence 257 output 80–81, 83, 86–94

phonology 9, 75, 113, 216 Cameroon English (CamE) phonology 4, 77, 100, 134 generative phonology 77, 119 Nso‘ English (Nso’E) phonology 110, 111 phonological evidence 100, 113 Pidgins and Creoles 6–7, 118, 137, 165, 192, 245 positioning theory 146, 150, 152 subject positioning 152 postcolonial 5, 101, 117 postcolonial varieties of English 5, 136 postcolonial Englishes 7, 99, 117– 118 postcolonial pragmatics 9, 20 postcolonial communities/ spaces 99, 102, 117 predictability 50–51, 119 reduplication 6, 17, 191–195, 197, 199, 201, 203, 205–207, 211, 254 derivative reduplication 204, 206 inherent reduplication 195–196, 201, 211 one-to-one mapping 17, 199, 201, 208, 211–212 reduplication and plurality 196 reduplication and tone 207–208 reduplication for restriction 198– 199, 211, 221 (religious) missionaries 3, 5, 105, 166, 248, 266, 272, 290 Baptist missionaries/evangelisation 5, 273 Dutch missionaries 109, 271 East Anglian Catholic missionaries 105 German missionaries 18, 109 missionary schools 105 root modality 33, 36 commissives 36 deontic 32, 36, 46, 57

Subject index

323

directives 36 discourse-oriented 36 dynamic 36 existential 36 gradience 36 obligation 36, 39, 42–43, 45 volatives 36 root permission 48 root possibility 48 rule 47, 77, 79

conceptual translations 260 cultural equivalence and transfer 261–262, 264 domestication 264–265 foreignisation 264 trilateral process (TLP) 6, 9, 77–78, 80, 86, 118–119

semi-modals 30, 58 social actors 142–143 structuralist approach 64, 66, 73, 215 substratum influence 192–193 surface (representation) [SR] 77, 80, 94

variety-dictionary 15, 64, 66–67 vowel reduction 83, 85–87, 95, 97 vowel epenthesis 104

TMA questionnaire 165, 171–172, 175, 180–181, 184–186 translation 12, 18, 123, 126, 154, 176, 245–247, 258–259, 262

underlying (representation) [UR] 77, 80, 94, 96

West African English 63, 67, 77–78, 97, 121 dictionary of 67, 73 West African Pidgin (English) 10–12, 269, 271–272, 290 World Englishes 6–7, 9, 64–65, 67, 73, 93, 118–119