Editing Creole language (section)

==Classification==
===Historic classification===
According to their external history, four types of creoles have been distinguished: plantation creoles, fort creoles, [[Maroon (people)|maroon]] creoles, and creolized pidgins.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt |Arends|Muysken|Smith|1995|p=15}}</ref> By the very nature of a creole language, the [[Phylogeny|phylogenetic]] classification of a particular creole usually is a matter of dispute; especially when the pidgin precursor and its parent tongues (which may have been other creoles or pidgins) have disappeared before they could be documented.

Phylogenetic classification traditionally relies on inheritance of the lexicon, especially of "core" terms, and of the grammar structure. However, in creoles, the core lexicon often has mixed origin, and the grammar is largely original. For these reasons, the issue of which language is ''the'' parent of a creole – that is, whether a language should be classified as a "French creole", "Portuguese creole" or "English creole", etc. – often has no definitive answer, and can become the topic of long-lasting controversies, where social prejudices and political considerations may interfere with scientific discussion.<ref name=DeCamp /><ref name=Sebba /><ref name="Traugott 1977" />

===Substrate and superstrate===
The terms [[Substrata (linguistics)|substrate]] and [[superstratum|superstrate]] are often used when two languages interact. However, the meaning of these terms is reasonably well-defined only in [[second language acquisition]] or [[language shift|language replacement]] events, when the native speakers of a certain source language (the substrate) are somehow compelled to abandon it for another target language (the superstrate).<ref name=Weinreich>{{Harvcoltxt|Weinreich|1979}}</ref> The outcome of such an event is that erstwhile speakers of the substrate will use some version of the superstrate, at least in more formal contexts. The substrate may survive as a second language for informal conversation. As demonstrated by the fate of many replaced European languages (such as [[Etruscan language|Etruscan]], [[Breton language|Breton]], and [[Venetian language|Venetian]]), the influence of the substrate on the official speech is often limited to pronunciation and a modest number of loanwords. The substrate might even disappear altogether without leaving any trace.<ref name=Weinreich />

However, there is dispute over the extent to which the terms "substrate" and "superstrate" are applicable to the genesis or the description of creole languages.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Mufwene|1993}}</ref> The language replacement model may not be appropriate in creole formation contexts, where the emerging language is derived from multiple languages without any one of them being imposed as a replacement for any other.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Singler|1988}}</ref><ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Singler|1996}}</ref> The substratum–superstratum distinction becomes awkward when multiple superstrata must be assumed (such as in [[Papiamento]]), when the substratum cannot be identified, or when the presence or the survival of substratal evidence is inferred from mere typological analogies.<ref name="Muysken 2001"/> On the other hand, the distinction may be meaningful when the contributions of each parent language to the resulting creole can be shown to be very unequal, in a scientifically meaningful way.<ref>Recent investigations about substrates and superstrates, in creoles and other languages, includes {{Harvcoltxt |Feist|1932}}, {{Harvcoltxt |Weinreich|1979}}, {{Harvcoltxt|Jungemann|1955}}, {{Harvcoltxt|Martinet|1964}}, {{Harvcoltxt|Hall|1974}}, {{Harvcoltxt|Singler|1983}}, and {{Harvcoltxt|Singler|1988}}.</ref> In the literature on [[Atlantic Creole]]s, "superstrate" usually means European and "substrate" non-European or African.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Parkvall|2000}}</ref>

===Decreolization===
Since creole languages rarely attain official status, the speakers of a fully formed creole may eventually feel compelled to conform their speech to one of the parent languages. This [[decreolization]] process typically brings about a [[post-creole speech continuum]] characterized by large-scale variation and [[hypercorrection]] in the language.<ref name=DeCamp />

It is generally acknowledged that creoles have a simpler grammar and more internal variability than older, more established languages.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/conference/2013_APiCS/files/abstracts.html |title=Creole and pidgin language structure in cross-linguistic perspective |date=August 2013 |publisher=Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology – Department of Linguistics}}</ref> However, these notions are occasionally challenged.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt |Arends |Muysken |Smith |1995 |p=9}}</ref> (See also [[language complexity]].)

Phylogenetic or [[linguistic typology|typological]] comparisons of creole languages have led to divergent conclusions. Similarities are usually higher among creoles derived from related languages, such as the [[languages of Europe]], than among broader groups that include also creoles based on non-[[Indo-European languages]] (like Nubi or Sango). [[French-based creole languages]] in turn are more similar to each other (and to varieties of French) than to other European-based creoles. It was observed, in particular, that [[definite article]]s are mostly prenominal in [[English-based creole languages]] and English whereas they are generally postnominal in French creoles and in the [[Quebec French|variety of French]] that was [[History of Quebec French|exported to what is now Quebec in the 17th and 18th century]].<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Fournier|1998}}, {{Harvcoltxt |Wittmann|1995}}, {{Harvcoltxt|Wittmann|1998}}.</ref> Moreover, the European languages which gave rise to the creole languages of European colonies all belong to the same subgroup of Western [[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]] and have highly convergent grammars; to the point that [[Sapir Whorf|Whorf]] joined them into a single [[Standard Average European]] language group.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt |Whorf|1956}}</ref> French and English are particularly close, since English, through extensive borrowing, is typologically closer to French than to other Germanic languages.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Bailey|Maroldt|1977}}</ref> Thus the claimed similarities between creoles may be mere consequences of similar parentage, rather than characteristic features of all creoles.