Editor for this issue: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar <aristar
linguistlist.org>
The following message appeared recently on CreoLIST; I thought the subject, and in particular John Rickford's response, would be of interest to a larger audience, so, with Rickford's permission, here they are. Other responses on the same subject may be found under CreoLIST on the LinguistList archive website, http://linguistlist.org/list-archives.html Rebecca Larche Moreton 301 South Ninth Street Oxford, MS 38655 USA - -------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 16:35:43 +0100 From: CreoLIST <CreoLISTMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueling.su.se> To: CreoLIST <CreoLIST
ling.su.se> Subject: Written Creole: Genuine or Hoax? Precedence: list ************************************************* ************* CreoLIST posting ************** Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 07:14:40 -0800 (PST) From: John Rickford <rickford
csli.Stanford.EDU> Subject: Written Creole: Genuine or Hoax? A student here drew my attention to the following query and reply on "The Straight Dope" forum (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/991112.html), which I reproduce for the interest of CreoLIST readers, along with my own comment (which they may or may not print). Excuse the length, but I thought the issues (which have to do with the legitimacy of writing in English Creole as well as Haitian) might be of interest to our group. John R. - -- Did HUD publish a brochure in "Creole" containing a parody of black speech? 29-Oct-1999 Dear Cecil: I work for a university library that receives massive amounts of federal government documents. The shipment I opened today included multiple translations of a pamphlet from the Department of Housing and Urban Development called Resident Rights and Responsibilities in Spanish, French, Ethiopian, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and Creole. The last one stopped me, since I had never seen a document written in Creole. So I opened it and read it. A paragraph is included below. This is a joke, right? "Yuh as a rezedent, ave di rights ahn di rispansibilities to elp mek yuh HUD-asisted owzing ah behta owme fi yuh ahn yuh fambily. Dis is a brochure distributed to yuh cawze Hud ah provide some fawm ahf asistance aur subsidy fi di whole apawtment buildin. As ah pawt ahfits dedication fi maintain di bes pawsible living enviornment fi all rezedents, yuh HUD field affice encourage ahn suppowts . . ." I don't mean to cast aspersions, but this looks like bad phonetics! What's the deal, Cecil? (1) Is Creole a written as well as an oral dialect? (2) Is there any French or Spanish influence in Creole (that's what I thought I would find)? (3) Are the above quotations formal written Creole? (4) If number three is false, how do I find out exactly who's been bogarting the bowl on the job to produce this document?--Eli Harvey, Palo Alto, CA Cecil replies: You skipped the best part: "We ave a pawtnaship wid everi rezedent of HUD-assisted owzing developments: HUD prowtekss di rights ahf di tenants, ahn tenants gauwd dem own right tru rispansible be'aviah. Owah goal is fi guh beyan dat pawtnaship ahn create a sense ahf community . . ." This is signed "Sekretary Andrew M. Cuomo fella." (For a longer excerpt, see www.straightdope.com/columns/hud doc.html.) What do we have here: a sincere but spectacularly misguided attempt to speak di language ahf di pipple, or racist parody? Michael Kane, executive director of the Boston-based National Alliance of HUD Tenants, has no doubts: "This is a vicious racist joke," he says. "It is clearly a malicious slur" that is "deeply insulting to African-American people." Kane speculates that the brochure was created by a prankster using one of the burlesque "Ebonics translation programs" available on the Internet. He thinks the responsible party "should be identified and fired." I got conflicting stories from HUD. Initially I spoke to a junior PR staffer who said a version of the brochure in Haitian Creole, a French-based language, had been published in October 1998. (In linguistics, creole is a generic term for the melding of a dominant language with elements of a subordinate language. Both French- and English-based creoles are spoken in the Caribbean.) The English-based version cited above appeared earlier this year, but HUD withdrew it in September (and the Haitian Creole version as well) after a complaint was filed. Insisting no malice was intended, the HUD staffer said the brochure was prepared by a contractor. Fine--blame the writer. That was on Friday. On Monday I heard from Ginny Terzano, HUD's public affairs director, who called to say that the document was bogus: "This was not sanctioned or authorized by HUD. We did not knowingly distribute this. We think it is offensive and in extremely bad taste." Having somehow gotten through the approval process, the brochure had a print run of 2,000 copies (a small quantity for HUD), 1,500 of which were distributed before someone higher up got wind of it. Says Terzano, "We are trying to get to the bottom of this." If the document was a prank, it was a clever one. "Whoever wrote the text used certain features to reproduce phonologically the peculiarities of Caribbean speech," says Professor Salikoko Mufwene, chairman of the linguistics department at the University of Chicago and an expert in English-based creoles. Authentic touches include "owme" for home, "affice" for office, and "fambily" for family, as well as the word "fi" (to or for), which is heard in the English-based patois of Jamaica. But no one with half a clue would seriously attempt to write such a brochure. One obvious problem: trying to produce a written document in what is primarily a spoken language. While a few French-based creoles such as Haitian have standardized spelling and are taught in the schools, English-based creoles don't and aren't. If a speaker of Caribbean English can read, he reads standard English. Even if you accept HUD's explanation you have to wonder what kind of review process would allow an embarrassment like this to get out the door. And if it was written in good faith, then, as Mufwene puts it, "They were stupid." No foolin, mon. - CECIL ADAMS [Comment on this answer] Cecil Adams can deliver the Straight Dope on any topic. Write Cecil at the Chicago Reader, 11 E. Illinois, Chicago 60611, or E-mail him at cecil
chicagoreader.com. - -------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 18:48:52 -0800 (PST) From: John Rickford <rickford
csli.Stanford.EDU> (1) It's not clear that this IS a form of "mock creole," parallel to Hill's "junk Spanish" (Pragmatics 5:197-212) or Ronkin and Karn's "Mock Ebonics" (J of Sociolinguistics 3:360-80). To begin with, there are authentic linguistic elements, not only the ones Mufwene refers to, but also the grammatical continuative marker "ah," found in Jamaican, Guyanese and other varieties, as in "HUD ah provide" (=HUD is providing). If someone is pulling a prank, it is someone with more "insider" knowledge than those who created the internet Ebonics sites or the translation filters that they utilize. (2) One of the features that makes this sample look suspect is its inconsistent and non-phonemic orthography. Contrary to "Cecil's" reply, there is a widely accepted phonemic spelling system for English-based creoles--the one developed by Frederic Cassidy in _Jamaica Talk_ in the 1960s, and subsequently adapted for other Caribbean varieties (Guyanese, Barbadian, Trinidadian, and so on) in many publications since. University of the West Indies linguist Hubert Devonish has for years been advocating that a standardized version of the Cassidy orthography be used throughout the Anglophone Caribbean to increase the amount of public writing in Creole (see his 1986 book, _Language and Liberation: Creole Language Politics in the Caribbean_). At the same time, we should not assume that a consistent phonemic orthography is what non-linguists like best and understand most easily. On the contrary, "lay" readers sometimes find phonemic spellings (e.g. /kou/ for "cow") too far removed from the regular spellings they're accustomed to, and they like the slightly modified versions of the latter that they encounter in novels and the like. In this respect, whoever wrote the HUD document might not have been completely off the mark. (3) To assume that Creole and other "vernacular" varieties that are primarily spoken CANNOT or SHOULD not ever be written--as Cecil's reply seems to suggest--is to foreclose the possibilities of change and to kowtow to the strictures of the "standard language ideology" that Rosina Lippi-Green writes about in _English with an Accent_ (1997), denying full access, understanding and enjoyment to those who do not command the legitimated variety. If similar strictures had been accepted in the history of English, writing and formal discourse in England (and its "Empire" around the globe) would still be conducted only in French (or Latin). If similar strictures had been accepted more recently in Haiti, the use of Haitian Creole in schools and in writing would never have occurred. (4) So far as English-based Creoles and dialects are concerned, a number of innovators have, for the past several decades, been flaunting convention and producing written works in the vernacular. Not unexpectedly, this has sometimes led to controversy, but this new creole/dialect writing has also won praise for the increased clarity, vitality and authenticity it has yielded. Examples come primarily from literary genres (poetry, short stories, novels, plays), but also from bible translations, and school texts (remarkably effective in boosting reading scores to the extent that their experimental use has been allowed). Two American examples that Russell Rickford and I cite in our forthcoming book (_Spoken Soul_, Jan 2000) are P.K. McCrary's translation of bible passages into African American Vernacular, and the American Bible Society's translation of the Book of Luke into Gullah or South Carolina/Georgia Sea Island Creole (_De Gud News Bout Jedus Wa Luke Write_). Rev. Ervin Greene, an African American pastor on St. Helena Island who assisted with the Gullah translation, said that an old Gullah speaker thanked him effusively for it, saying "Rev, fuh de firs' time--God talk to me de way I talk!" Prize-winning poets and writers from the Caribbean, African America and Hawaii have drawn not only on mainstream English, but also on their English creoles and dialects in their work. The list includes Nobel Prize Winners Derek Walcott (St Lucia) and Toni Morrison (USA) and Pulitzer and Tony Prize winner August Wilson (USA). (5) It is striking--and evidence of the force of the dominant language ideology faced by vernacular-writers and users that HUD's English creole version was withdrawn after a single complaint was filed. It is even more striking, that the Haitian Creole version was ALSO withdrawn even though no complaint was directed at that version and even though there is an established tradition of writing, reading and teaching in Haitian Creole. This is a pattern that has occurred repeatedly in the Caribbean and the US at least since the 1950s, and it has the effect of preserving and protecting the status quo, and stymieing efforts to enfranchise and include the masses in policy-making, communication, education and the arts. What if we took another approach, and encouraged innovations in the vernacular when a single commendation is received, like the one from the Gullah speaker who was delighted that in _De Good News Bout Jedus Christ Wa Luke Write_ God spoke to her for the first time, in her language? Even though it was written in a different creole than the one I speak natively (Guyanese Creole), the first time I read a translation of a portion of the bible into West African Pidgin English (similar to Guyanese Creole in a number of respects), I understood it with a clarity and immediacy than I never had before, despite my fluency in mainstream or standard English. (6) In sum, the HUD translation may not have been a hoax, but an attempt to convey whatever HUD intended to convey with a clarity and forcefulness that speakers of English-based creoles (quite numerous in New York, LA, Miami, Toronto, and elsewhere in North America) might well get most readily in their own vernacular. Its effectiveness as a translation is open to evaluation (as any translation might be), but let's not jump to the conclusion that ANY translation of a HUD document, or ANY use of creole for serious expository or expressive writing is out of the question. There are numerous examples already of the possibilies for innovation and success in this area. - John R. Rickford (Stanford)