Article published In: Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
Vol. 29:1 (2014) ► pp.49–85
Measuring analyticity and syntheticity in creoles
Published online: 7 February 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.29.1.02sie
https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.29.1.02sie
Creoles (here including expanded pidgins) are commonly viewed as being more analytic than their lexifiers and other languages in terms of grammatical marking. The purpose of the study reported in this article was to examine the validity of this view by measuring the frequency of analytic (and synthetic) markers in corpora of two different English-lexified creoles — Tok Pisin and Hawai‘i Creole — and comparing the quantitative results with those for other language varieties.
To measure token frequency, 1,000 randomly selected words in each creole corpus were tagged with regard to word class, and categorized as being analytic, synthetic, both analytic and synthetic, or purely lexical. On this basis, an Analyticity Index and a Syntheticity Index were calculated. These were first compared to indices for other languages and then to L1 varieties of English (e.g. standard British and American English and British dialects) and L2 varieties (e.g. Singapore English and Hong Kong English). Type frequency was determined by the size of the inventories of analytic and synthetic markers used in the corpora, and similar comparisons were made.
The results show that in terms of both token and type frequency of grammatical markers, the creoles are not more analytic than the other varieties. However, they are significantly less synthetic, resulting in much higher ratios of analytic to synthetic marking. An explanation for this finding relates to the particular strategy for grammatical expansion used by individuals when the creoles were developing.
References (51)
Aboh, Enoch O. 2009. Simplicity, simplification, complexity and complexification: Where have all the interfaces gone? In Enoch O. Aboh & Norval Smith (eds.),
Complex processes in new languages
, 1–25. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Aston, Guy & Lou Burnard. 1998.
The BNC handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA
. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Baker, Philip. 1995. Motivation in creole genesis. In Philip Baker (ed.),
From contact to creole and beyond
, 3–15. London: University of Westminster Press.
. 1997. Directionality in pidginization and creolization. In Arthur K. Spears & Donald Winford (eds.),
The structure and status of pidgins and creoles
, 91–109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
. 2002. No creolisation without prior pidginisation. In Terry Crowley & Jeff Siegel (eds.),
Studies in creole linguistics in memory of Chris Corne, 1942-1999 (Te Reo 44)
, 31–50. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.
Bakker, Peter, Aymeric Daval-Markussen, Mikael Parkvall & Ingo Plag. 2011. Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles.
Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
26(1). 5–42.
Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2000.
Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning, and use
. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bussmann, Hadumod, Gregory Trauth & Kerstin Kazzazi. 1996.
Routledge Dictionary of language and linguistics
. New York: Routledge.
Byrne, Francis. 1987.
Grammatical relations in a radical creole: Verb complementation in Saramaccan
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Chaudenson, Robert. 2001.
Creolization of language and culture (revised in collaboration with Salikoko S. Mufwene)
. London: Routledge.
Craats, Ineke van de, Norbert Corver & Roeland van Hout. 2000. Conservation of grammatical knowledge: On the acquisition of possessive noun phrases by Turkish and Moroccan learners of Dutch.
Linguistics
381. 221–314.
Danchev, Andrei. 1992. The evidence for analytic and synthetic developments in English. In Matti Rissannen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.),
History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics
, 25–41. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter..
DeGraff, Michel. 1999. Creolization, language change, and language acquisition: An epilogue. In Michel DeGraff (ed.),
Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development
, 473–543. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.
. 2005. Morphology and word order in ‘creolization’ and beyond. In Guglielmo Cinque & Richard S. Kayne (eds.),
The Oxford handbook of comparative syntax
, 293–372. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Godfrey, John J., Edward C. Holliman & Jane McDaniel. 1992. SWITCHBOARD: Telephone speech corpus for research and development.
IEEE International Conference on Speech, and Signal Processing, ICASSP-92
, 517–520.
Greenbaum, Sidney (ed.). 1996.
Comparing English worldwide: The International Corpus of English
. Oxford: Clarendon.
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1960. A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language.
International Journal of American Linguistics
26(3). 178–194.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax.
Folia Linguistica
45(1). 31–80.
Holm, John & Peter L. Patrick (eds.). 2007.
Comparative creole syntax: Parallel outlines of 18 creole grammars
. London: Battlebridge.
Inoue, Aya. 2007. Copula patterns in Hawai‘i Creole: Creole origin and decreolization. In Magnus Huber & Viveka Velupillai (eds.),
Synchronic and diachronic perspectives on contact languages
, 199–212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. .
Kellerman, Eric. 1995. Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere?
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
151. 125–150.
Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?).
Second Language Research
131. 301–347.
Kusters, Wouter. 2003.
Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection
. Utrecht: LOT.
. 2008. Complexity in linguistic theory, language learning and language change. In Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.),
Language complexity: Typology, contact, change
, 3–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Matthews, Stephen & Virginia Yip. 1994.
Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar
. London/New York: Routledge.
McWhorter, John. 2007.
Language interrupted: Signs of non-native acquisition in standard language grammars
. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press..
Michaelis, Susanne, Philippe Maurer, Martin Haspelmath & Magnus Huber (eds.). 2013.
Atlas of pidgin and creole language structures online
. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL].
Miestamo, Matti. 2009. Implicational hierarchies and grammatical complexity. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.),
Language complexity as an evolving variable
, 80–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mosel, Ulrike. 1980.
Tolai and Tok Pisin: The influence of the substratum on the development of New Guinea Pidgin
. Canberra: Australian National University (Pacific Linguistics B-73).
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001.
The ecology of language evolution
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muysken, Pieter & Norval Smith. 1995. The study of pidgin and creole languages. In Jacques Arends, Pieter Muysken & Norval Smith (eds.),
Pidgins and creoles: An introduction
, 1–14. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nichols, Johanna. 2009. Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.),
Language complexity as a variable concept
, 110–125
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parkvall, Mikael. 2008. The simplicity of creoles in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.),
Language complexity: Typology, contact, change
, 265–285. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Sapir, Edward. 1921.
Language: An introduction to the study of speech
. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.
Schwegler, Armin. 1990.
Analyticity and syntheticity: A diachronic perspective with special reference to Romance languages
. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Seuren, Pieter A. M. & Herman Wekker. 1986. Semantic transparency as a factor in creole genesis. In Pieter Muysken & Norval Smith (eds.),
Substrata versus universals in creole genesis
, 57–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Siegel, Jeff. 2003. Substrate influence in creoles and the role of transfer in second language acquisition.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
251. 185–209.
. 2012. Accounting for analyticity in creoles. In Bernd Kortmann & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.),
Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact
, 35–61. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Smith, Geoff P. 2002.
Growing up with Tok Pisin: Contact, creolization, and change in Papua New Guinea’s national language
. London: Battlebridge.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2009. Typological parameters of intralingual variability: Grammatical analyticity versus syntheticity in varieties of English.
Language Variation and Change
21(3). 319–353.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt & Nuria Hernández. 2007.
Manual of information to accompany the Freiburg Corpus of English Dialects Sampler (‘FRED-S’)
. URN: urn:nbn:de:bsz:25-opus-28598
. Freiburg: University of Freiburg. [URL] (20 September, 2013.)
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt & Bernd Kortmann. 2009. Between simplification and complexification: Non-standard varieties of English around the world. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.),
Language complexity as an evolving variable
, 64–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 2011. Typological profiling: Learner Englishes versus indigenized L2 varieties of English. In Joybrato Mukherjee & Marianne Hundt (eds.),
Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes: Bridging a paradigm gap
, 167–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Cited by (18)
Cited by 18 other publications
Olguín Martínez, Jesus
Biber, Douglas, Tove Larsson & Gregory R. Hancock
Röthlisberger, Melanie & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
Röthlisberger, Melanie & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt & Melanie Röthlisberger
Nuria Yáñez-Bouza, Emma Moore, Linda van Bergen & Willem B. Hollmann
Bogolyubova, Olga, Polina Panicheva, Roman Tikhonov, Viktor Ivanov & Yanina Ledovaya
Kouwenberg, Silvia & John Victor Singler
Blasi, Damián E., Susanne Maria Michaelis & Martin Haspelmath
Haspelmath, Martin & Susanne Maria Michaelis
2017. Analytic and synthetic. In Language variation – European perspectives VI [Studies in Language Variation, 19], ► pp. 3 ff.
Röthlisberger, Melanie, Jason Grafmiller & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
Siegel, Jeff
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
