Talk:Tok Pisin

Manki

 * Just edited vocab word manki. It is not derived from English "monkey" as is commonly believed. As the German influence has faded it is often forgotten that many Tok Pisin words had their origin in the German colonial era in New Britain and northern New Guinea. Manki derived from the rather paternalistic put-down German word, männchen (little man) - and until the 1980s was the common Tok Pisin word for a child. A male domestic worker assigned to mind the boss' kids was called manki-masta - the boss of the kids. Due to the distance from the German era, and the dying out of the older generation, most PNG people today believe it derived from English "monkey", and naturally tend to object to its use. In the 1980s, there was a governmental initiative to try and eradicate the use of manki, manki-masta and meri, all perceived as derogatory. In the case of manki they have largely succeeded - it has been largely replaced by pikinini (curiously, derived from the Portuguese "pequenino" - meaning the same thing!) - though manki is still widespread as an equivalent to "kids". Manki-masta was supposed to be replaced by domestik - which never caught on. It is usually replaced by haus man or haus meri. In the case of meri the failure to change it to woman was abysmal - it is too deeply entrenched, and meri is heard everywhere still. Colin Richardson


 * Can we get a citation for this? Männchen is pronounced, which I would expect to be adapted to Tok Pisin phonology as something like mensen, not manki. --Ptcamn 12:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Not necessarily. Historical texts show that the "ch" sound in German was borrowed into the language as "k" One example of this is the early Tok Boi "kirke" from the German "kirche".


 * Sorry - can't give a citation. It was something I learned in years in PNG, both as a kid 45 yrs ago, and as an adult. The modern German pronunciation you cite is not necessarily final - German has many dialects and regional pronunciations. The Flemish word "mannekin", and the French "mannequin" have a common origin with "männchen", as I understand it - and pronunciations a lot closer to manki. Changes from English into Tok Pisin can be wildly different from the origin - compare pikbel with "pig belly", or banis with "fence" (via Pacific Pidgin "fenis", Bislama "fanis"). Curious that if the origin were "monkey" - why does the same word not appear in other parts of the world where English had influence? The term manki appears only in ex-German New Guinea - not in Solomons, not in former British West Africa, not in Vanuatu, not in Aboriginal pidgins - all of whom use variations on "piccaninny". Significant, I think. Cheers, Colin


 * Of course manki (meaning a small boy) comes from "monkey"!! The idea that somehow it shouldn't be is based on a sort of "anti-racist cringe" - or perhaps from confusion with the once common, and genuinely racist/offensive, "PNG English" usage - still heard from expatriate Australians well into the nineteen seventies - of "Rock Ape", meaning a PNG national, especially a particularly thick headed one. The idea of it being derived from any known German word is extremely far-fetched - the words cited do not resemble each other very closely, as remarked above. Any Australian (remember Australian English is the main source of Pidgin vocabulary) who was a small boy in the nineteen fifties or earlier would probably remember the tendency of adults (including his own parents) to call him a "little monkey" - and perhaps even warning him on visiting the zoo to keep out of the way of the keepers lest he get put in the monkey cage by mistake. Correct derivation of "Manki" is something like "Small boy - from jocular/affectionate Australian English slang monkey = small boy. I think this only started to be called into question at all when the custom of calling boys monkeys in Australian English had become less fashionable. Incidentally, this makes it clear (I hope) why the word never got a hold in places where non-Australian forms of English formed the basis of creoles. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 04:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * There are several problems with this theory too. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that your arguments are "wrong" but they are certainly debatable.


 * i) The term "monkey" to refer to a child is common in British English even to this day. It's not used exclusively to refer to male children, it isn't and never has been specific to any period of time and has never been a feature limited to Australian English. Therefore using this as explanation of it's use in a given time, place or gender relevent to Australian English not completely sound.


 * ii) Texts from the early 20th century show the use of two different words. "Manki" to refer to a boy or unmarried man, and "monki" to actually refer to a monkey. Whereas there are many hundreds of examples of Tok Pisin applying multiple definitions to a single English derived word, there is not one instance (that I'm aware of) of Tok Pisin taking a single english word and then separating it into two different words with different meanings and pronunciations (excepting of course "doubling-up" such as "lukim" / "luklukim"). In short, if both these words and meanings were derived from a single English word, this would be a freak occurance. It may simply be that differences are down to regional pronunciation or that the transcribers were subconciously influenced by English spelling, but we simply can't be sure beyond doubt.


 * iii) Historical texts show that the "ch" sound in German was borrowed into the language as "k" One example of this is the early Tok Boi "kirke" from the German "kirche". Ruling out the proposed German origin on the grounds expected phonological transformation, would seem to be premature. Now, the question of the missing "n" remains, but there are valid explanations for that too.


 * iv) Why is an extended derivation of "monkey (monkey) > boy (manki) > unmarried man (manki)" easier to believe than one of "young man (mannchen) > unmarried man (manki)" once the phonological issues are removed?


 * In short, the origin of the word is a matter of reasonable dispute, and one which goes back to references in the 1930s at least. Your theory about modern political correctness "might" be true and is certainly ineresting, but without an academic citation it should not be included. What is also plausible is that this is a case of multiple words giving birth to singular term in a creole, of which there are several examples. e.g. antap - on top (English = on top) + atap - roof (Tolai = roof) or sanga = forked branch, tongs (English = shanghai for catapult, German = Zange for pliers, Malay = tjang for branch) It may well be that the word came from multiple sources and was adopted variously in terms of time and place, with different origins and conotations, then ultimately both words "merged" due to similarity in meaning and sound. Neither origin seems to be completely satisfactory on its own. That's just my theory though.


 * The matter would seem to be a matter of valid academic discussion and far from settled, so I have edited the entry accordingly to remove bias and uncited claims and simply say that the origin is disputed, quoting both suggestions.Bearinasidecar (talk) 17:08, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have further edited this to preserve the mention of the possible "German derivation" while reducing "waffle" and labouring the "dispute" bit a little less. Your point that other English speakers also call small boys monkeys taken (I'd only heard it here). Derivations of words, even in languages with extended literary traditions, are of course often unclear and ambiguous. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough :)Bearinasidecar (talk) 11:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

(Sorry for the "original research" but I think we all know there are not too many official sources on Tok Pisin.) When I lived in Lae and learned Tok Pisin from people there, they said "Mangi" for boy. The lady who taught me most was from Sepik, but I learned from a wide bunch from Tari, Goroko and all over the place. They all said "Mangi". Of course they all spoke Pisin as a 2nd language and I'm Scottish, so also not mother tounge. 206.248.129.83 (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Just quietly we are all in "original research" mode here for the same reason you are! But there is of course no doubt at all that "Manki" in pidgin is the usual term for a boy, unless there has been, at least in some circles, a kind of cringe away from it. The dispute is over the idea that it might NOT be derived from the English word "Monkey". Well, I suppose that is just possible - frankly the (very) obvious derivation seems to me to be, well, very obvious - and I honestly can't think what the need to bring in German words is, especially when the sound (as opposed to the spelling) is actually quite distinct. Won't repeat my old comments, which remain very aposite. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The word "Mangi" means "young man or boy" and is made up of "man" ,meaning man, and the suffix "gi" meaning young from the variations and attemps of language exchange within the country (Papua New Guinea). The pronounciation of "Mangi" to "Manki" arises as a result of phonetic variations from different language groups that pronounce "g" as "k" or "p" as "f" for eg: the word "pig" is pronounce by some other language groups as "fik". It is also worth pointing out that Tok pisin has its own variations within Papua New Guinea where different language groups adapt some words in their language into it and not all words in Tok pisin are derived from english. With that been said, Papua New Guinea is the land of many languages and if a word is adapted from any of the local languages it is only a matter of time before it becomes popular. And, without proper doucumentation of the origins of the words, most english speakers tend to think that it should all be derived from english or some wetsern culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PNG Scientist (talk • contribs) 10:22, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

save the pidgin
I first encountered this language in the 1980s upon reading James Blish's novel The Night Shapes (1962), set in early-1900s Africa. As example, the narrator, to say, "I wish to speak to the man in charge" said "mi spik bigfella," which at the time deeply impressed me with its concision. After that, I was fascinated with "trade pidgin," and it was only after the Wkkipedia arose that I found the "tok pisin" concept.

What dismays me in this article is the apparent tone-deafness of the various editors. Look to the lede grafs: the point is largely missed that "tok pisin" is a VERY simple transliteration of the term "talk business" — "business speak" or rather "trade speech."

Almost all verbiage derives from colloquial English, when heard rather than read. For instance, "I would like toothpastae" is "Mi laikim sop bilong tit" — "Me like'm soap belong teeth," that is to say "I would like (to have) (the) soap for (my) teeth." Conversely, "I don't speak pidgin well" = "Mi no save gut long tok pisin" ("long" = "along," so you have "me no savvy (understand) good along with trade-speak").

Though the article makes the case that it's a primary language of Papua New Guinea and used by "[p]erhaps one million people," the language has been deprecated by the Wikipedia community and hundreds of articles blanked, yet we somehow still have Esperanto, an entirely artificial language. Please don't get me wrong: I have studied Esperanto since 1974, but tok pisin is an ACTIVE language used on a daily basis, something Esperanto cannot claim. Weeb Dingle (talk) 05:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Development of Tok Pisin
the "Development of Tok Pisin" section is a bit weak, and a lot of the references are not in wikipedia format. I don't know if this means it's an inexperienced editor or copy pasted plagiarism? i'm currently watching this youtube: Langfocus, and it has some interesting history, i know youtube isn't the most highbrow source, but it's a start. Irtapil (talk) 17:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "Tok Pisin" in Tok Pisin
I just removed the pronunciation [ˌtok piˈsin] from the article because it was not supported by a complete citation to any source, and I am not sure whether the stress on the final syllable is correct. Smith says that per Wurm (1985), "stress is normally on the first syllable" and "stress patterns more closely resembl[e] those of English among speakers more familiar with English" (page 201). So stress on the second syllable of [piˈsin] would be surprising as it doesn't match either the normal rule for Tok Pisin or the stress pattern of the English source word pidgin. Thus, I don't think we should present this stress pattern unless it can be verified.I haven't seen the stress of this word given in any articles or dictionaries I have looked at so far. I am curious if anyone has ideas for how to better confirm the correct local pronunciation. @Womtelo, I think you may have been the first to add this pronunciation to the article with this edit here; can you clarify whether that was based on personal experience with the language, or on some source that you remember? Urszag (talk) 05:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I looked a little further and found the following observations about accent in John W. M. Verhaar's "Toward a Reference Grammar of Tok Pisin: An Experiment in Corpus Linguistics" (1995): "Tok Pisin compounds have the accent on the NI component" as a general rule, but may have "even stress" (page 296); Verhaar categorizes "tok pisin" as a compound of the form "Extensive Core + NI" (pages 284, 287). This confirms at least that the primary stress is expected to fall on one of the two syllables of Pisin. I tried to find videos on Youtube containing the name of the language, but didn't always find it easy to tell which of the two vowels in [pisin] should be transcribed with greater stress: I'm not sure whether as an English speaker, I might mishear the use of an unreduced vowel in the second syllable as involving an actually nonexistent stress. That's why I think we need a reliable source to tell us what the right analysis is. I'm wondering though whether [tokpisin], with stress marks omitted, could be an acceptable transcription to use if we can't find a source that gives stress information.--Urszag (talk) 06:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * hi, I have heard from native speakers of the language. However, there is apparently variation about which syllable is stressed;  and stress is non-contrastive anyway. So I like your idea of restoring the segmental transcription, but without stress. My main reason for adding the pronunciation (back in 2009!) was mainly to make it clear that the English pronunciation did not reflect the actual autonym.  I'll go ahead and restore the pronunciation tip, as per your suggested solution. Best -- Womtelo (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC).

Missing sources
The sources for "Hymes 1971b", "Mühlhäusler 1984", "Mühlhäusler 1991", and "Romaine 1991" are missing. They either need to be provided, or any statements sourced to them removed as uncited. DuncanHill (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)