Verb allomorphy and the syntax of phases

Abstract

In a number of French-related creoles a distinction is made between long and short forms of verbs. We argue that the alternation is a reflex of French inflectional morphology that has survived the creolization process, showing that the result is a long-short opposition of verb forms, similar to the formal variation in the learner varieties, and therefore ultimately due to learner strategies in the acquisition of French as a second language. We further discuss the potential role of substrate and argue that the alternation started out as a phonological/prosodic phenomenon (as it basically still is in Haitian Creole). We conclude that the alternation (or verb allomorphy) can be seen as a morphological reflex of the Spell-Out domain at the vP-level.

The long and short of verb alternations in Mauritian Creole and Bantu languages

“…We then observed that the comparison with other French--based creoles suggests that the Bantu substrate had some influence on the emergence of the verbal alternation in Mauritian Creole in its current form. Although there is socio--historical evidence for the relation between Bantu and Mauritian Creole, upon closer inspection there turn out to be few similarities in synchronic data on verb forms, as shown in section 3 and noted in Veenstra (2009). We sketched two possible scenarios in which Bantu substrate(s) could have had influence on the alternation in Mauritian Creole.…”

“…First, a direct influence of the languages of zone S is unlikely, because there is no evidence that "zone--S speakers" were ever in direct contact with Mauritius for a sufficiently long period or with a numerically relevant impact (cf. Veenstra 2009). Second, this substrate language could not have been a predecessor of the languages that are now in both zone P and S, because by the relevant time, these were different languages in different geographical areas (Janson 1991/92).…”

“…Two other structural factors are dissimilar for Mauritian Creole and Bantu. First, the use of the short or long form in Mauritian Creole is sensitive to the argument-adjunct distinction (Baker 1972;Zribi--Hertz & Li Pook Tan 1987;Seuren 1990Seuren , 1995Syea 1992;Veenstra 2009;Henri 2010). The short form is used before an argument (12a), while the long form is used before an adjunct, like the locative in (12b).…”

“…As mentioned in Veenstra (2009), the long/short alternation in Mauritian Creole is reminiscent of the conjoint/disjoint (CJ/DJ) distinction in Bantu languages (Meeussen 1959). Although he is sceptical about the role played by Bantu languages in the remoulding of French into Mauritian Creole and even claims that "the grammatical underpinnings of the alternation in Mauritian Creole and the Bantu languages, Makhuwa in particular, [are] just not similar enough to enable us to come up with a realistic scenario on the emergence of the long/short opposition in Mauritian Creole in terms of substrate influence" (Veenstra 2009: 109), we nevertheless believe that part of the answer to the questions above lies in the contribution of the substrate languages that were present at the relevant period on the Mascarene Islands.…”

Serial Verb Constructions in Indian Ocean French Creoles (IOCs)

“…The second verb in the examples that follow drops its final vowel if it is followed by a complement. For a detailed analysis of this phenomenon, see Seuren (1986), Syea (1992), and Veenstra (2009). The difference between (19a) on the one hand and (19b,c) on the other is clearly unexpected if they all involve coordination.…”