Talk:Post-creole continuum

Untitled
what is the Jamaican continuum?

Merge
I propose that acrolect, mesolect, and basilect be merged here. They are simply three points on the continuum. It makes more sense to discuss them in one place rather than repeat the same points across four different articles. There can be a section Post-creole speech continuum which each of the three pages would redirect to, simply to allow the redirect to jump straight to the definitions of the terms. jnestorius(talk) 00:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That assumes there would be different sections for each part. But I think you're right, a m and b aren't really that expandable on their own.  Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  06:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It doesn't. In fact the simplest would be to change a m and b to #REDIRECT Post-creole speech continuum and replace the wikilinks with bolding in that para, thusly...


 * === Stratification ===
 * William Stewart, in 1965, proposed that the terms acrolect and basilect be the sociolinguistic labels for the upper and lower boundaries respectively of a post-creole speech continuum. In the early 1970s Derek Bickerton popularized these terms as well as mesolect to refer to the phenomenon of code-switching used by some users of creole languages who also have some fluency in the standard language upon which the contact language is based.  There are no discrete boundaries between the different varieties and the situation in which such a continuum exists involves considerable social stratification.

...with I suppose more elaboration of a m and b ensuing. jnestorius(talk) 23:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Very true. I'm all for this merger.  Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  06:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Before merging, I would anyone who knows better than me to explain me something: are post-creole continuum and basilect–acrolect continuum exactly the same thing? In the articles about Jamaican Patois and Guyanese Creole it is stated that there is a continuum between Creole and English. But in Cape Verdean Creole there is neither a “middle form” between Creole and Portuguese, neither a continuum. There is indeed a continuum within the Creole, with a basilect less influenced by Portuguese and an acrolect more influenced by contemporary Portuguese, but the speakers are always aware the difference between the two languages, they are always separated. Ten Islands (talk) 11:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * They are the same. Not all Creole languages have a continuum (like Haitian Creole).  If you look at Jamaican Patois you see that speakers only have a concept of the basilect and acrolect (Patois and English respectively) even though they have a command of a range of mesolects.  It's probably the same for Cape Verdean Creole.  If it's not, then Cape Verdean possibly has a situation called diglossia wherein the two registers (prestige and non-prestige) have two distinct social functions but it's not accurate to call these two registers acrolect and basilect.  Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  16:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Attention! I have re-checked my sources and Dulce Pereira, in her book Crioulos de base portuguesa (Ed. Caminho, Lisboa – 2006), does call the variations within a creole language as “basilects” and “acrolects”. If her usage of the words is wrong, then let’s go for the merge. If her usage of the words is correct, then there are two situations that must be distinguished:
 * {| class="wikitable"

! colspan="2" | variations between the Creole language and the lexifier language ! colspan="2" | variations within the Creole language
 * rowspan="5" |Post-creole continuum || rowspan="3" |Creole language || rowspan="3" |Basilect–acrolect continuum ||Basilect
 * Mesolect
 * Acrolect
 * Intermediate between Creole language and lexifier language
 * colspan="2" |
 * Lexifier language
 * colspan="2" |
 * }
 * Take a peek at these examples, and you will see that there are situations where a Creole language may be less or more influenced by its lexifier language, but being those two languages always separated, without having a continuum between them. Ten Islands (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Lexifier language
 * colspan="2" |
 * }
 * Take a peek at these examples, and you will see that there are situations where a Creole language may be less or more influenced by its lexifier language, but being those two languages always separated, without having a continuum between them. Ten Islands (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Take a peek at these examples, and you will see that there are situations where a Creole language may be less or more influenced by its lexifier language, but being those two languages always separated, without having a continuum between them. Ten Islands (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm much too ignorant to comment on TenIslands' point; but whether or not there is a distinction between the basilect-acrolect continuum and the creole-lexifier continuum, there should still be a merger between the three pages acrolect-mesolect-basilect; either into the Post-creole speech continuum page, or to some other page (acrolect-basliect continuum??) jnestorius(talk) 08:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The link provided seems to argue that there is a continuum with CV creole. If this article doesn't already clarify it, the post-creole speech continuum is not actually a continuum between the most creolized form and the lexifier language but between the most creolized form and the least creolized form, the latter often being almost identical to the lexifier language.  So I would put the table like this.


 * While there are multiple mesolects, I'm pretty certain that, as Bickerton defined it, there is only one acrolect and only one basilect. Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  09:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with Æµ§œš¹, that in regard to within a creole, the acrolect - mesolect - basilect breakdown should be explained on one page, as oppose to the current three separate pages. I'm fairly new to discussions on Merge topics, so what is the process now? Do we just keep discussing this? Or is there a 'mod', who at some point will make a decision based on the general consensus and either create a new page, or leave things the way they are? Jclu (talk) 19:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Any one of us can merge. Since I've done it before, I'll go ahead and do it.  Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  21:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Arabic: acrolect, basilect mesolect
A new variety of Arabic is appearing - Formal Spoken Arabic based on a number of Arabic dialects. This form has neither the complexities of the Literary Arabic (الفصحى (al-)fuṣ-ḥā) nor the particularities of the many Arabic dialects العامية (al-)`āmmiyya (East) or الدارجة (ad-)dārija (West).

The above section I added was deleted, it refers to Arabic acrolect, basilect and the new mesolect, not necessarily Creole languages. --Anatoli (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Acrolect, basilect and mesolect phenomena restricted to creole languages, so whatever it is that is arising in Arabic-speaking areas is not a mesolect. Besides, this page is strictly about creole languages.  — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  06:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Table
As far as I can see, numbers 17 an 18 are the same, are they not? Licqua (talk) 12:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No. 17 is  and 18 is .  Close, but missing the   — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  16:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I Added Some Weasel Words
The following paragraph quoted next contains dubious unsourced statements. Rather than delete, and because I don't have the time to find sources, but also because I suspect that a definitive sourced answer cannot exist, I've added a couple of words that might induce doubt in a careful reader. Spaceboots1 (talk) 01:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

"Use of the terms acrolect, mesolect and basilect attempts to avoid the perceived value judgement inherent in earlier terminology, by which the language spoken by the ruling classes in a capital city was defined as the "correct" or "pure" form while that spoken by the lower classes and inhabitants of outlying provinces was "a dialect" characterised as "incorrect", "impure" or "debased". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceboots1 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

(Original text in bold was simply "avoids the") Spaceboots1 (talk) 01:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


 * In general, one avoids weasel words. One should also tag unsourced statements with either fact or dubious if they aren't removed. — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]  01:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I realize this. I gave my justification for my edit. Spaceboots1 (talk) 03:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Given your justification, there are other, more appropriate courses of action available. If you come upon a similar situation in the future, I recommend one of those tags. In addition to calling attention for those reading the article, those attempting to address uncited or dubious statements may see what articles use such templates.  — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]  04:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

This page could be better
Basilect, mesolect and acrolect are words used not only in creolistics, but also in general linguistics, especially in the context of (Ferguson's) diglossia, where basilect is an L-variant, acrolect an H-variant, and mesolect an intermediate variant (Tussentaal in Belgian Dutch). Their original meaning (in the context of creoles) has been expanded to explain the differences in modern sociolinguistics. That's why mesolect is used in modern Brazilianistics and Arabistics for variants which are between L and H. Mesolect is also used for describing some varieties of Japanese (and Japanese is hardly a creole language). Furthermore, words acrolect (H), mesolect (M), basilect (L) are also used to describe various registers of Singapore English (which is not a creole either).

Further reading:

1. Language change via language planning: some theoretical and empirical aspects with a focus on Singapore; Sherida Altehenger-Smith

2. New Englishes: the case of Singapore; Joseph Foley

3. The Fergusonian Impact: Sociolinguistics and the sociology of language; Charles Albert Ferguson,Joshua A. Fishman

4. Japanese morphophonemics: markedness and word structure; Junko Itō, Armin Mester

5. Understanding Arabic: essays in contemporary Arabic linguistics in; El-Said M. Badawi, Alaa Elgibali

6. Portuguese: a linguistic introduction; Milton Mariano Azevedo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Martens (talk • contribs)