Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (163) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (70)
- Part of a Book (35)
- Conference Proceeding (35)
- Book (10)
- Working Paper (5)
- Other (3)
- Part of Periodical (2)
- Report (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (52)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (42)
- Gesprochene Sprache (16)
- Corpus linguistics (11)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (7)
- Diskursmarker (7)
- Computerlinguistik (6)
- Corpus technology (6)
- Interaktionsanalyse (6)
- Texttechnologie (6)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (163) (remove)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (43)
- de Gruyter (19)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (10)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (5)
- The Association for Computational Linguistics (5)
- Heidelberg University Publishing (4)
- Narr (4)
- Synchron (4)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (3)
- Narr Francke Attempto (3)
In this paper, we discuss to what extent the German-based contact language Unserdeutsch (Rabaul Creole German, cf. Volker 1982) matches the category‘creole language’ from both a socio-historical and structural perspective. As a point of reference, we will use typological criteria that are widely supposed to be typical for creole languages. It is shown that Unserdeutsch fits fairly well into the pattern of an ‘average creole’, as has been suggested by data in the Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures (Michaelis et al. 2013). This is despite a series of atypical conditions in its development that might lead us to expect a close structural proximity to the lexifier language, i.e. a relatively acrolectal creole. A possible explanation for this striking discrepancy can be found in the primary function of Unserdeutsch as a marker of identity as well as in the linguistic structure of its substrate language Tok Pisin.