Nigerian Pidgin vs. Tok Pisin: A Comparison of the Grammar

Nonfiction, Entertainment, Drama, Anthologies
Cover of the book Nigerian Pidgin vs. Tok Pisin: A Comparison of the Grammar by Julia Burg, GRIN Verlag
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Julia Burg ISBN: 9783638602020
Publisher: GRIN Verlag Publication: January 30, 2007
Imprint: GRIN Verlag Language: English
Author: Julia Burg
ISBN: 9783638602020
Publisher: GRIN Verlag
Publication: January 30, 2007
Imprint: GRIN Verlag
Language: English

Seminar paper from the year 2006 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 2,3, University of Freiburg (Englisches Seminar), course: Pidgins and Creoles, 7 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: 1. Introduction Nigeria and Papua New Guinea are two of many countries which have adopted English as their main language. But having so many other, substrate languages influencing the development of a English-speaking country, two major pidgin languages developed: Nigerian Pidgin and Tok Pisin. If one wants to compare these two pidgins with each other, it seems almost inevitable to consider their great geographical distance as well as their historical differences. But my intent in this work is not to elaborate on the status and function and development of the two pidgins but on their differences in grammar. Therefore I'll mainly focus on the noun phrase and the verb phrase. 2. Morphology 2.1Plural marking on nouns in Tok Pisin The majority of the English based Creole and Pidgin languages both at the Atlantic coast and the South Sea waive marking plurality on nouns or rather use it very optionally. Thus, the same applies to Nigerian Pidgin and Tok Pisin. But if there occurs the need to make a clear distinction between singular and plural both pidgins absolutely dispose of a pluralizer. In Tok Pisin the most common way to express plurality is by the use of the particle ol, which at the same time is identical to the third person plural pronoun. Ol, clearly derived from the English 'all', occurs before the noun as opposed to the post-nominal English plural marking suffix -s. (1)Mi lukim dok. (2) Mi lukim ol dok. I saw the dog. I saw the dogs. (Siegel) But according to Geoff P. Smith (2002), ' there is a great deal of variability, and the presence or absence of ol is still somewhat unpredictable' (p 66). This can clearly be seen in the following example, in which only one noun takes the pre-nominal ol although both have plural meaning. (3) Em i stap nau ma(ma) bl' em wokim spia nau em i kam nau ma bl' em wokim ol bet. He stayed, his mother made arrows, he came and his mother made beds. (Smith 2002: 66) Although the particle ol is the dominant plural marker, the pluralizing suffix -s 'has also become a feature of urban Tok Pisin' (Romaine 1992:219). In order to explain the use of the plural -s, Smith adopts from Romaine 'that animacy does have some influence, with a larger proportion of human than animates using the suffix, and that count nouns take -s considerably more often than mass nouns' (p 71). It is also very often found that the plural is doubly marked...

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Seminar paper from the year 2006 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 2,3, University of Freiburg (Englisches Seminar), course: Pidgins and Creoles, 7 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: 1. Introduction Nigeria and Papua New Guinea are two of many countries which have adopted English as their main language. But having so many other, substrate languages influencing the development of a English-speaking country, two major pidgin languages developed: Nigerian Pidgin and Tok Pisin. If one wants to compare these two pidgins with each other, it seems almost inevitable to consider their great geographical distance as well as their historical differences. But my intent in this work is not to elaborate on the status and function and development of the two pidgins but on their differences in grammar. Therefore I'll mainly focus on the noun phrase and the verb phrase. 2. Morphology 2.1Plural marking on nouns in Tok Pisin The majority of the English based Creole and Pidgin languages both at the Atlantic coast and the South Sea waive marking plurality on nouns or rather use it very optionally. Thus, the same applies to Nigerian Pidgin and Tok Pisin. But if there occurs the need to make a clear distinction between singular and plural both pidgins absolutely dispose of a pluralizer. In Tok Pisin the most common way to express plurality is by the use of the particle ol, which at the same time is identical to the third person plural pronoun. Ol, clearly derived from the English 'all', occurs before the noun as opposed to the post-nominal English plural marking suffix -s. (1)Mi lukim dok. (2) Mi lukim ol dok. I saw the dog. I saw the dogs. (Siegel) But according to Geoff P. Smith (2002), ' there is a great deal of variability, and the presence or absence of ol is still somewhat unpredictable' (p 66). This can clearly be seen in the following example, in which only one noun takes the pre-nominal ol although both have plural meaning. (3) Em i stap nau ma(ma) bl' em wokim spia nau em i kam nau ma bl' em wokim ol bet. He stayed, his mother made arrows, he came and his mother made beds. (Smith 2002: 66) Although the particle ol is the dominant plural marker, the pluralizing suffix -s 'has also become a feature of urban Tok Pisin' (Romaine 1992:219). In order to explain the use of the plural -s, Smith adopts from Romaine 'that animacy does have some influence, with a larger proportion of human than animates using the suffix, and that count nouns take -s considerably more often than mass nouns' (p 71). It is also very often found that the plural is doubly marked...

More books from GRIN Verlag

Cover of the book Die Langobarden in Italien by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Entfremdung und Verdinglichung bei Marx und Lukács, Horkheimer/Adorno und Habermas sowie Honneth, Nussbaum und Böhme by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Urban Gardening im Kontext von Foucaults 'Von anderen Räumen'. Sind urbane Gärten Heterotopien? by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Der ökologische Fußabdruck by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Der Psalter - Klagelieder des Einzelnen by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Der Herrscherkult am Beispiel Demetrios Poliorketes. Formen und Gründe by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Anforderungen an Person und Kompetenz eines Religionslehrers by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Kulturelle Bildung in der Schule. Zwei Projekte aus Deutschland und England im Vergleich by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen einer international genutzten Internetpräsenz by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Stottern im Kindesalter by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Konversion und Apostasie in den abrahamitischen Religionen by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Telefonumfragen - methodische, rechtliche und kommunikationswissenschaftliche Grundlagen by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Determinismus und moralische Verantwortung - Schließen sie sich aus? by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Die Darstellung des Geschlechts im Schulbuch - Eine Analyse by Julia Burg
Cover of the book Kultur und Bildung. Die Begründungszusammenhänge von Geisteswissenschaftlicher Pädagogik und Pädagogik der Kritischen Theorie by Julia Burg
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy