In this article I propose that creoles are relatively transparent compared to their source languages. This means that they display more one-to-one relations between meaning and form. Transparency should be distinguished from the concepts of simplicity, ease of acquisition, and regularity. Definitions of these notions are given and it is shown how they have been mixed up in earlier literature.The transparency of creoles is explained as a result of language contact. When people speaking radically different languages communicate, they tend to use maximally intelligible forms, i.e. transparent forms. The repeated selection of transparent over opaque forms will lead to the formation of a relatively transparent language. Hence, creoles are predicted to be either as transparent as or more transparent than their source languages.An empirical study is performed to test this prediction. The transparency of four contact languages and their sub-and superstrates is measured by checking them on a list of non-transparent features. It turns out that they all exhibit opaque structures, but that there is a striking absence of so called form-based forms: linguistic elements and rules that are not motivated pragmatically or semantically. This indicates that such 'empty' forms are lost during intense language contact.

Languages differ widely from one another in the extent to which they are transparent, i.e. obey one-to-one relationships between meaning and form. Transparency, in turn, is an important factor in the learnability of languages. This paper first sets out a framework for the study of transparency and subsequently studies cross-linguistic differences in transparency, using the theory of Functional Discourse Grammar as its point of departure. Transparent and non-transparent features of languages are systematically defined using the multi-level architecture of this model of language, representing them as mappings between and within levels. In applying this framework to a sample of 30 languages it is shown that the (non-)transparent features investigated can be ordered into an implicational transparency hierarchy, and that as a result the languages of the sample can be ranked in terms of their degrees of transparency as well. Finally, the consequences of these findings for the learnability of languages are discussed.

Syntagmatic redundancy involves the multiple expressions of a single meaning within a phrase or clause. It is often claimed to be a linguistic universal that serves to facilitate expressivity, processing, and learnability. However, there is little empirical evidence supporting this theory. This paper combines a typological study of concord, a form of syntagmatic redundancy in which a lexical and a grammatical item with overlapping meanings are expressed in the same phrase or clause, with a functional analysis of concord. The purpose of the study was to find out if redundancy is indeed universal or whether there are cross-linguistic restrictions. The goal of the functional analysis was to provide better understanding of what motivates different forms of redundancy. Reference grammars of a 50-language variety sample were analyzed for the existence and communicative functions of four types of concord. The results show that argument concord and temporal concord are nearly universal, whereas only a subset of languages allow for negative concord and plural concord. Two functional principles are shown to motivate concord: the need to be precise, and the need to emphasize crucial information. These principles lead to distinct types of redundancy: The need to be precise results in accidental redundancy in the case of an obligatory grammatical marker, whereas the need to emphasize information invokes purposeful redundancy. The two types of redundancy are shown to be fundamentally distinct in their communicative nature as well as their characteristic diachronic development.

No abstract