d:/weng/16-2/25-2.

3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

World Englishes, Vol 16, No. 2, pp. 185204, 1997. 08832919

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum?

JEFF SIEGEL*

ABSTRACT: It is generally accepted that there is a post-pidgin or post-creole continuum in Melanesia,

similar to those found in West Africa and the Caribbean. But is there really? This question is answered by
examining in detail the linguistic features of Tok Pisin (the Papua New Guinea variety of Melanesian
Pidgin) which reportedly result from decreolization (or depidginization) and the linguistic features of
Papua New Guinea English, looking for the influence of Tok Pisin. Code-switching and transference
between Tok Pisin and English and the reported existence of intermediate forms are also discussed. It is
concluded that an English-to-pidgin continuum does not exist in Papua New Guinea or in the other
Melanesian countries. The distinctiveness and status of Melanesian Pidgin are described as possible
reasons for the lack of such a continuum. The situation in Melanesia does not support the life-cycle view of
pidgin/creole development, and lends weight to the view that post-creole continua result from early
variation and not later decreolization.

INTRODUCTION

Melanesia is one of the areas of the world where a pidgin-to-English or post-pidgin

continuum is supposed to exist. This article examines the sociolinguistic situation in
Melanesia to see whether this is really true. It begins with a brief review of both the
English-lexifier pidgins and the varieties of English reported spoken in four Melanesian
countries. Then it goes on to look at the notion of the `post-pidgin continuum,' and to
consider whether or not it really applies to conditions in these countries. Following is a
discussion of some important socio-cultural and political factors which may distinguish
Melanesia from other areas. The article concludes with a brief consideration of the
theoretical implications of these findings.1

1. VARIETIES OF ENGLISH AND PIDGINS IN MELANESIA

In the independent Melanesian countries (Fiji,2 Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands
and Vanuatu), English is an official language, and the language of education (along with
French in Vanuatu). However, it is the mother tongue of only a small minority, probably
less than 1 percent of the population of these countries. (With regard to the non-
independent countries, France still controls New Caledonia and Indonesia has more
recently subjugated large Melanesian populations in West Papua and East Timor; see
Table I.)
Overviews of the history and current role of English are given for the Pacific in general
by Watson-Gegeo (1989) and Romaine (1991), for Fiji by Siegel (1989), for Papua New
Guinea by Romaine (1989a), for Solomon Islands by Watson-Gegeo (1987), and for
Vanuatu by Crowley (1989). A brief summary of this information is given below:

*Department of Linguistics, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. e-mail: jsiegel@
metz.une.edu.au

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

186 Jeff Siegel

Table 1. Melanesian countries

Date of Official/educational
Country Colonial power(s) independence language(s) Pidgin language(s)

Fiji Britain 1970 English Pidgin Fijian

Pidgin Hindustani
Papua New Guinea Britain, Germany, 1975 English Tok Pisin
Australia Hiri Motu
Solomon Islands Britain 1978 English Pijin
Vanuatu Britain & France 1980 English, French Bislama
New Caledonia France French
West Papua The Netherlands, Bahasa Indonesia
Indonesia
East Timor Portugal, Indonesia Bahasa Indonesia

Fiji
The indigenous inhabitants of Fiji make up about half of the population of approxi-
mately 700,000, and speak varieties of Fijian as their mother tongue. About 45 percent of
the population are descendants of imported Indian indentured labourers and speak Fiji
Hindi. English, however, is the de facto national language of Fiji, the official language of
government, the main language of business, and the language of instruction in schools
after third grade. In the broadcasting media, it has equal time with the standard forms of
the vernaculars: Fijian and Hindi. Weekly newspapers also appear in these languages, but
the English dailies are by far more popular.
A distinct variety of English has emerged in Fiji, spoken by all ethnic groups. It is often
classified as one of the `New Englishes' or indigenized varieties of English (Moag 1982;
Platt et al. 1984). The main features of Fiji English have been described most recently by
Siegel (1989, 1991), but a more detailed, large scale study is currently being carried out by
Jan Tent, a lecturer at the University of the South Pacific.
No variety of pidgin English has developed in Fiji; rather, Pidgin Fijian and Pidgin
Hindustani have been used for interethnic communication (Siegel, 1986, 1987). The pidgin
English reported in Fiji by Wurm (1971) was actually a variety imported by immigrant
plantation laborers who had previously worked in Queensland or Samoa. This variety is
now extinct in Fiji. The `Fiji Pidgin English' referred to by Geraghty (1977, 1984) is
actually a variety of Fiji English, unrelated to any pidgin once spoken in Fiji (Siegel 1987:
237). Since there can be no pidgin-to-English continuum without a pidgin, I will not be
saying anything more about Fiji in this article.

Papua New Guinea

In Papua New Guinea (PNG) where over 800 vernacular languages are spoken by a
population of approximately 3.8 million, English holds a similarly important official
position as the language of government (at least in written communication) and the
medium of instruction from first grade in all government schools. However, Tok Pisin, the
PNG dialect of Melanesian Pidgin (MP), is more widely used as a lingua franca in both
official and unofficial contexts and is considered by some to be a better candidate than
A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997
d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 187

English for the national language.3 It is also used to a large extent in parliamentary debates
(Nekitel, 1990) and in government publications. On the other hand, broadcasting on the
national level is almost entirely in English, except for certain news bulletins in Tok Pisin
and Hiri Motu, and the relay of parliamentary debates. There are two English daily
newspapers and a Tok Pisin weekly, Wantok.
A distinct indigenized variety of English has also emerged in PNG (Platt et al., 1984).
The features of PNG English have been described in detail by A.-M. Smith (1978, 1988a,
1988b). A regional variety of PNG English spoken in the Milne Bay province has been
outlined by Yarupawa (1986).

Solomon Islands
English is also the official and school language of the Solomon Islands, though it is
spoken by only 1015 percent of the population of approximately 300,000. Even then, it is
spoken as a distant second language. Pijin, the Solomon Islands dialect of MP, is much
more widely used as the lingua franca among speakers of the country's more than 80
vernacular languages.4 But unlike Tok Pisin, Pijin is rarely found in any official contexts,
though it is more widely used in national radio broadcasting.
A distinct Solomon Islands English may be emerging, but it has not yet been studied
(Watson-Gegeo, 1987: 29).

Vanuatu
The position of English is quite different in Vanuatu, a country of approximately
160,000 people with 105 vernacular languages. According to Article 3(1) of the Constitu-
tion, the national language is Bislama, the Vanuatu dialect of MP. English is an official
language, along with Bislama and French, and a principal language of education, along
with French (but not Bislama). In contrast to the other Melanesian countries, English is
not the main language of government in Vanuatu or of the media, having only a minor role
in radio broadcasting and sharing space equally with French and Bislama in the country's
weekly newspaper.
Also in contrast to the other Melanesian countries, English is very rarely spoken among
the educated elite. Using Bislama is often a necessity because some of the elite are educated
in English, and some in French, and fluent English/French bilingualism is not that
common.5 Thus, a distinct Vanuatu variety of English does not appear to have emerged
(Crowley, 1989: 44).

2. THE POST-PIDGIN CONTINUUM

The notion of the `post-pidgin continuum' is derived from that of the `post-creole
continuum' (DeCamp, 1971), originally described (but not named) by Schuchardt (see
Meijier and Muysken, 1977: 31). Linguistically, it is characterized by a continuum of
lexical, phonological and grammatical features ranging from those closest to a standard
form of the creole's lexifier language (the acrolect) and those furthest from the lexifier
language, and therefore most `creole-like' (the basilect). Thus, there is a great deal of
variation in the speech community and the point at which a form of speech is located along
the continuum depends on the context as well as the social characteristics of the speaker.
For example, the speech of the urban professional elite would be toward the acrolectal end

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

188 Jeff Siegel

whereas the speech of a poor rural peasant would be toward the basilectal end.
Intermediate or mesolectal varieties are also found in between.
The social conditions for a post-creole continuum outlined by DeCamp (1971: 351)
include a standard form of the lexifier language being the dominant official language, the
partial break down of formerly rigid social stratification so that some social mobility is
possible, and access to education in the dominant language. Thus, this phenomenon is
supposedly the result of the lexifier language becoming the target and the creole then
becoming heavily influenced or restructured by it, a process called `decreolization.'
The terms post-creole continuum and decreolization are sometimes applied to situations
where an expanded pidgin comes into renewed close contact with its lexifiers.6 For
example, O'Donnell and Todd (1980: 52) state:
A further phase in the development of a pidgin is what has been called a `post-creole continuum,'
although the phenomenon thus described is not limited to areas where pidgins have become the
mother tongue of a speech community. When a creole or expanded pidgin exists in a community
where its lexical source language is the language of education and politics . . . the two linguistic
systems inter-influence each other with the result that one finds, not two distinct systems, but an
unbroken spectrum between the pidgin or creole on the one hand and the prestigious standard
language on the other.

The terms `post-pidgin' and `post-pidgin continuum,' though, are now used to describe
the situation relating specifically to a pidgin language (Muhlhausler, 1980: 22; Appel and
Muysken, 1987: 156). Muhlhausler (1986: 237) gives the following definition:
In general terms, by a post-pidgin or post-creole variety we understand a pidgin or creole which,
after a brief period of relatively linguistic independence, has come under renewed vigorous
influence from its original lexifier language, involving restructuring and/or replacement of earlier
lexicon and grammar in favour of patterns from the superimposed `target' language.

The best-known post-creoles are in the Caribbean region (e.g., DeCamp, 1971; Bick-
erton, 1975a), and the best-known post-pidgin continua are in West Africa (Todd, 1982:
286; Bokamba, 1991: 497). Since the social conditions are apparently similar in Melanesia,
some scholars have applied the notions of a post-pidgin/creole continuum and decreoliza-
tion to MP, especially to Tok Pisin. Bickerton (1975b) speculates that a continuum may
develop in PNG similar to those in Guyana and Nigeria. A similar point is made by
Sankoff (1976: 308):
Though the distinction between Tok Pisin and English is still very clear, there are some signs that
the urban New Guinea linguistic situation is moving toward what has been characterised as a
`post-creole continuum' (DeCamp, 1971) in other colonial and ex-colonial situations.

A decade later, Kale (1990: 190) says that `a pidgin-English continuum may be evolving.'
However, O'Donnell and Todd (1980: 52) clearly include PNG, along with the West
Indies and West Africa, in the areas where post-creole continua have already developed.
Aitchison (1981: 21214) also describes the `decreolization' of Tok Pisin and Romaine
(1992: 323) concludes that `decreolization is already advanced in urban areas like Lae,' and
says that a `fully fledged continuum of the Jamaican type' has recently come into existence
in PNG. In her earlier textbook on pidgin and creole languages, Romaine (1988: 304) also
mentions the existence of a post-pidgin continuum in PNG as well as West Africa. Finally,
Muhlhausler (1986: 23749) gives several linguistic examples from Tok Pisin to illustrate

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 189

the post-pidgin situation, although he questions the unilinear view of decreolization (and
`depiginization').
But is there really a post-pidgin continuum, or more specifically a pidgin-to-English
continuum, in PNG, and in other Melanesian countries? This question is the topic of the
remainder of this article.

3. IS THERE REALLY A PIDGIN-TO-ENGLISH CONTINUUM IN MELANESIA?

In order to answer this question, I will first examine the following aspects of the
situation in PNG: (1) the current linguistic features of Tok Pisin (TP) which reportedly
result from decreolization (or depidginization); (2) the current status of English-influenced
innovations that were reported almost 40 years ago; (3) the linguistic features of PNG
English, looking for the influence of Tok Pisin; (4) code-switching and transference; and
(5) the reported existence of intermediate forms. On the basis of this examination, I will
make some conclusions about PNG and then go on to look at the situations in the other
Melanesian countries.

3.1 Current linguistic features of TP

Lexicon. The influence of English in the TP lexicon is unmistakable; the distinction
between the urban and rural sociolects made by Muhlhausler (1975, 1985b) is based mainly
on differences in the distribution of lexical items, some more commonly rural and others
more commonly urban. Some examples are (Siegel, 1985: 531):
rural urban
bungim kolektim `collect'
meri gel `girl'
gat hevim `have'
tok nogut swea `swear'

However, other formerly urban or anglicized TP items have now become common all
over PNG, even in rural areas:
rural urban/rural
bosman menesa `manager'
gohet divelopmen `development'
yangpela yut `youth'
ol manmeri pablik `the public'
helpim sapotim `support'
orait oke `OK' (especially as a discourse marker)

Also, there are many lexical items supposedly part of urban Tok Pisin which are
comprehensible only to English-TP bilinguals, for example, the items in small capitals in
the following extract from a speech of a Member of Parliament (Nekitel, 1990: 31):
Tenkyu Mista Spika: mi laik askim a supplementary tasol long minnista a-a em i gat tingting long
a-am formulate-im wanpela policy dispela ol man ya ol i kolim ol yut ya ol i raskol na gavman i
givim ol mani taim since taim ol i stat i kam inap nau na i nogat wanpela bikpela wok i kam na ol i no
go bek na ol i no rehabilitate-im ol. So inap long painim wanpela as o i no inap inap long yu putim
dispela ol mani bilong yut i go insait long kristen kristen yut organization we i gat moa kaikai . . .
Olsem na inap long Minista bilong Yut i senisim policy bilong yu na lukluk long dispela na divert-
im mani i go . . .

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

190 Jeff Siegel

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to ask a supplementary (question) to the minister whether he's
thinking of formulating a policy about these people called youth who are really criminals and the
government gives them money since they started (the scheme) up until now and they haven't done
anything with it and they haven't gone back and haven't been rehabilitated. So can a reason be
found or not can you put this money for youth into a Christian youth organization that has
more credit. Thus, can you the Minister of Youth change your policy and look into this and divert
the money . . .]

However, it is more likely such items are not really integrated into any widely spoken
variety of Tok Pisin. Either they are part of a special political register (Scorza and
Franklin, 1989: 48), or they are the result of transference (Clyne, 1987: 740). This is the
spontaneous and momentary transfer of a single lexical item or phrase from one linguistic
system into another, also known as nonce borrowing (Romaine, 1989b: 61).
Aitchison's (1981: 212214) claim that TP is undergoing decreolization is based almost
entirely on the widespread borrowing from English among some urban speakers. Romaine
(1992: 171) says, `There is now a considerable gap between urban and rural Tok Pisin
which is due partly to the greater anglicization of the lexicon of town speech. The
increasing use of English is one manifestation of decreolization.' However, careful reading
of her study shows that for certain items, some rural areas show greater usage of an
anglicized form than urban areas, for example English cow instead of TP bulmakau (158).
(There are also some methodological problems with the study, as pointed out in Siegel,
1994.) Also, the degree of anglicization in some cases seems to be based on geographical
rather than social factors, for example the use of oke rather than orait in various locations
in one province (147).
It is also important to point out that a great deal of the lexical expansion occurring in
both urban and rural TP is based on the internal resources of the language, not English.
For example, the development of many new idioms and metaphorical expressions, as
described by G. P. Smith (1990), are not based on English:
expression literal meaning idiomatic meaning
kisim win `get wind' `have a rest'
karim kaikai `give food' `get the desired result'
kapsaitim wara `pour water' `urinate'
putim skin `put one's skin' `try to make an impression'
sem pipia `ashamed rubbish' `very ashamed'
suytim tok `shoot talk' `blame'

In addition, indigenous PNG languages are still a potential source of new lexical items,
such as atos `fellow Siassi Islander' (Muhlhausler, 1991: 644).
Thus, while it is true that the lexicon of TP is being anglicized to some extent, this
phenomenon cannot be correlated specifically with any particular social group. Further-
more, English is not the only source of lexical expansion in the language, and the use of
English items by bilinguals may indicate spontaneous borrowing (transference) rather than
integrated borrowing.

Phonology. Muhlhausler (1986: 23940) gives the introduction of consonant clusters as

in bihaindim instead of bihainim `to follow' as an example of phonological restructuring
of TP due to English, but gives no details of their distribution. Romaine (1992: 172210)
describes in detail phonological variation in TP with regard to certain phonological

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 191

contrasts, such as [p] versus [f]. She claims that `the most important factor seems to be the
influence of English' (208), even though she has shown many other factors may be
involved, such as the nature of the substrate languages and variation earlier in Tok
Pisin's history. She also concludes (211) that `these changes can be regarded as part of the
more general process of decreolization.'
But again, there is no regular correlation with social factors such as the urban-rural
distinction or age of the speaker. All we can conclude is that English is one of the factors
that is influencing some phonological distinctions for some speakers in some areas. This is
not a pidgin-to-English continuum.
On the other hand, G. P. Smith (1994: 16) describes large-scale lexical borrowing from
English in the Tok Pisin spoken in Manus and concludes that `the adopted lexical items are
generally fully integrated' into Tok Pisin phonology, and that there is no evidence of any
change in Tok Pisin phonological distinctions.
Furthermore, once again the most striking phonological change in TP is internally
motivated and has nothing to do with English; this is morphophonological reduction
(Lynch, 1979; G. P. Smith, 1986; Romaine, 1992). For example, in the Tok Pisin of young
urban speakers, the preposition bilong is often reduced to /blo/, /blo/ or even /bl/ as in dok
bilong em `his dog' pronounced as /dok blem/.

Morphology. One of the most commonly referred to `post-pidgin' features of TP is the

reported existence of two systems of plural marking. The first is the TP use of ol as a NP
non-obligatory proclitic, as in Em i lukim ol bikpela pik `He saw the big pigs.' The second is
the use of the English -s plural, as in Sampela gels i wok long pilai basketbol `Some girls are
playing basketball.' However, Muhlhausler points out that -s plural marking is
unsystematic and results from language mixing (1986: 241). He illustrates, for example,
how one writer of Tok Pisin may use both methods inconsistently, as in ol gels and ol girl
both being used to mean `the girls,' while another consistently uses boys for `boys' but meri
or ol meri for `girls' (242). Another uses the -s plural for only certain items:
planti meri wok olsem taipis, post office clerk, `Many women work as typists, post office
nurses, radio announcer na sampela wok moa clerks, nurses, radio announcers and other
jobs'

Thus, it may be misleading to say that using the -s plural is an alternative `system' of plural
marking in Tok Pisin.
Furthermore, Romaine (1992: 237) notes that in her detailed data on plural marking, 41
percent of -s marked nouns are `double marked' with ol, for example: ol skul bois na gels
`the school boys and girls.' This seems to indicate that the TP system is still in operation,
despite the presence of the -s. Also, since plural marking is optional in TP grammar, the
fact that a word occurs in TP with the -s plural marker but without the ol plural marker
does not necessarily mean it is being grammatically marked for plural just because that is
the function of the -s in English. As Romaine points out (238), `The occurrence of wanpela
inseks [`one insect'] indicates a case where the form was borrowed in the plural, rather than
a true suffixed plural.'
This may be true of many other cases as well, and rather than having a dual system of
plural marking, educated Tok Pisin speakers may be spontaneously borrowing English
words with their plural suffix. As pointed out by Crowley (1992: 21718), the most likely
words to occur in TP with the -s plural are those `that are copied from English on an ad hoc
A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997
d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

192 Jeff Siegel

basis.' Romaine's study (1992: 22632) shows that -s plural marking occurs more
frequently in urban areas and that there is a correlation between its use and amount of
schooling. Lynch (1979: 5) also notes that it occurs mainly among TP speakers who are
also fluent in English. Linguistic evidence is also found in Romaine's (1992) work. First of
all, she classifies 107 out of a total of 195 types (about 55 percent) of -s plural marking as
`nonce plural formations' (233). Second, according to the data, only 9 percent of the -s
marked forms are exclusively TP words (i.e., those with nontransparent English origin,
such as mambu `bamboo,' and those from other languages, such as kiau `egg'); the
remainder are clearly English, adapted into TP from English or ambiguously either
English or Tok Pisin. Only 2 percent are `nonce-formations' of words of non-English
origin with the -s plural, such as pikininis `children' and muruks `cassowaries' (238).
The existence of these forms, as well as those with double marking, may indicate the
beginning of a linguistic change, but at present there is actually very little evidence of two
competing systems of morphological plural marking in TP. Instead, there is variation in
the degree of transference of English plural forms into TP.

Syntax. Muhlhausler (1985a: 13840) lists several syntactic `post-pidgin' features of TP.
Some of these, such as new prepositions and new causal conjunctions, can be considered as
lexical borrowings which have been around for a long time. For example, bikos `because'
can even be found in Mihalic's 1971 dictionary. Others are part of borrowed phrases, such
as ov in Haus ov Assembli `House of Assembly.' Two features, embedded sentences with
hau and comparatives with mo . . . long, may reflect English syntax, but their distribution is
not known:
post pidgin normal usage
Yu lukim hau ol i sindaun Yu lukim ol i sindaun olsem wanem `See how they live'
Em i mo bikpela long mi Em i bikpela winim mi `He's bigger than me'
Both Muhlhausler (1985a: 140, 1986: 2456) and Romaine (1992: 2978) deal with the
relatively recent innovation in TP writing and broadcasting of using husat `who' as a
relativizer in addition to its normal use as an interrogative pronoun (Siegel, 1981), for
example:
Na i gat planti nesenel politik man husat i givin `And there are many national politicians who
sapot bilong ol i go long pati ya. (Wantok, no. are giving their support to this party.'
379: 6)
Muhlhausler (1986: 245) says that this construction began as a calque on written English,
but points out that it has diverged from English usage as it is no longer restricted to human
referent, as in the following:
East New Britain em wanpela long ol tripela `East New Britain is one of the three pro-
Provinces husat i bin kisim ful pawa bilong em vinces which has got complete power for
yet (Radio Morobe, 29/6/1981) itself.'

Romaine (1992: 244317) discusses the other TP relativizer we and additional syntactic
developments, namely the grammaticalization of bai as a future marker (see also Sankoff,
1977) and the `degrammaticalization' of i as the predicate marker. These developments,
however, are not related to English. Other relatively recent developments in TP morpho-
syntax, such as the sa- and la- aspect prefixes (Lynch, 1979), also have nothing to do with
English.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 193

Thus, there appears to have been little effect of English on the developing grammar of
TP, and thus no evidence of the kind of restructuring which characterizes a post-pidgin/
creole continuum.

3.2 English-influenced innovations in the past

In an article published more than 40 years ago, Hall (1955) describes many linguistic
innovations that had taken place in TP since the 1930s. The main source of these
innovations, he said, was English, more specifically, Australian English. Since access to
English began to increase even more after the 1950s because of access to education, we
would expect that these innovations would have been reinforced, and that if there was a
continuum, they would be found at the acrolectal end. However, this does not appear to be
the case, except for lexical items, as I will now illustrate.

Lexicon. Most of the lexical innovations described by Hall still exist in PNG. These
include English replacements for former German loans, for example plen for hobel `plane,'
and single English items for compounds, such as opis for haus pepa `office.' However, a few
are no longer commonly found, for example: damis `damage,' els `otherwise,' and farawe
`faraway.' Significantly, Hall also talks about urban-rural differences in vocabulary
existing 40 years ago (105).

Phonology. The following innovations described by Hall are not commonplace features
of current TP:
(a) /T/ and /D/ as additional phonemes;
(b) /ts/ for what is /tS/ or /D/ in words from English, e.g. /tum@ts/ `very' (4 too much); and
(c) supposedly Australian pronunciations of certain vowels, e.g. /a.I/ for /e/ as in /na.Im/ for /nem/
`name.'
However, one innovation he lists is the additional consonant clusters, mentioned in section
3.1.

Morphology. The following innovations described by Hall are not features of any variety
of current TP:
(a) omission of the -pela suffix on adjectives, e.g., gut taim instead of gutpela taim `good time';
(b) use of the indefinite articles a and an (still only in loan phrases);
(c) use of the -ing verbal suffix (see also Muhlhausler, 1985a: 135);
(d) use of English and /n/ and but as conjunctions.

On the other hand, many of the morphological innovations listed by Hall are found in
current TP, but they cannot really be attributed to the influence of English. These include:
(a) use of the suffix -pela with polysyllabic adjectives, e.g. yelopela `yellow';
(b) use of husat `who' and wanem `what' with additional indefinite functions, e.g., wanem ples
`whatever place' or `any place';
(c) use of save `know' as a habitual marker (mentioned above); and
(d) use of bin as a past marker, as in em i bin sik `she was sick.'
The morphological innovations that can be attributed to English are:
(a) -s plural marking (already discussed);
(b) use of the English number system, e.g., twenti instead of tupela ten `twenty.'

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

194 Jeff Siegel

With regard to -s plural marking, if this was developing as a competing system in TP 40

years ago, we would expect it to be more widespread in current TP. The fact that it is not is
further evidence that its use in current TP is more indicative of transference than
restructuring. The adoption of the English number system, however, has permeated
virtually all varieties of TP, but it is more a lexical than a morphological innovation.

Syntax. Again, the following innovations in phrase structure are not found in current TP
except in loan phrases:
(a) attribute + head NPs, such as gavmen skul `government school.'
(b) possessor + head NPs, e.g., Mista Roberts trak instead of trak bilong Mista Roberts `Mr
Roberts' truck';
(c) adverb + adjective, e.g., mo planti instead of planti tumas `very much.'

An English kind of dative construction in TP is mentioned by Hall (105), but it is not clear
to me that it is really due to `post-pidgin' influence:
post-pidgin normal usage
Em i givim mi liklik pe Em i givim liklik pe long mi `He gave me a little pay'

At the end of the study, Hall concludes (1089):

. . . [T]he chief respects in which Neo-Melanesian [a now obsolete term for TP] is being affected by
recent innovations are those of vocabulary, phrase-structure and phonemics, in the order given.
The two most basic aspects, morphology (except for the numeral system) and clause-structure, are
relatively untouched.

If we consider that the innovations in phrase structure he describes are mainly in loan
phrases, then the influence from English seems again to be mostly in the lexical area.
Restructuring had not begun to any extent, and nearly all those innovations which were
recorded did not last or become more widespread. This is not what we would expect if TP
was under structural pressure from English. As Hall puts it (109), `These considerations
would suggest that, despite present-day innovations under cultural pressure from English,
Neo-Melanesian is keeping its individuality and independence of linguistic structure.'

3.3 The linguistic features of PNG English

If a pidgin-to-English continuum exists in PNG, we would expect not only the
influence of English on Tok Pisin but also the influence of Tok Pisin on PNG English
(PNGE). However, with the exception of the lexicon, little if any such influence can be
found.
A small set of TP words have come into PNGE, as well as into the English spoken by
expatriates living in the country. These are terms for some relatives, such as bubu
`grandparent, grandchild' and tambu `in-law' (see Holzknecht, 1989), and for typically
Papua New Guinean items, for example:
wantok `speaker of the same language'
bilum `string bag'
kaukau `sweet potato'
kumu `spinach-like greens'
singsing `traditional singing and dancing'
mumu `earth oven'

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 195

laplap `sarong or wrap-around piece of material'

pitpit `edible wild sugar cane'
bilas `decoration (including make-up and jewellery)'

Other English words with shifted meaning appear to have come into TP and PNGE
around the same time, for example raskol/rascal `criminal.' Also, some PNGE expressions
are clearly loan translations from TP, e.g., give sixty from givm siksti `go very quickly.'
However, most common words which are exclusively identified with TP are not
generally heard in normal PNGE conversation, for example pikinini `child,' arere
`border, edge,' malumalu `soft' and surik or suruk `move back.'
With regard to phonology, A.-M. Smith (1988a) shows that, as with TP, PMGE is
affected by speakers' first languages, and so this is not a fruitful area of comparison. An
examination of PNGE grammar, however, shows virtually no influence from TP. For
example, the inclusive-exclusive and dual-plural distinctions of the TP pronoun system are
not reflected in PNGE. In contrast, in the creole-to-English continuum in Australia,
similar distinctions in Australian Kriol are found in some varieties of Aboriginal English
(Harkins, 1994: 52):

Tok Pisin PNG English Aboriginal English

1 inclusive dual yumi (tupela) we me'n'you
1 exclusive dual mipela we me 'n' him/her
1 exclusive plural mipela we us mob/we
2 dual yutupela you you-two
2 plural yupela you you-mob/youse
3 dual (em)tupela they them/those/two
3 plural ol they them/that-mob

With regard to PNGE morphology, there is no marking of adjectives analogous to the use
of the -pela suffix in TP, and no marking of transitive verbs with the -im suffix or by any other
means. The TP tense and aspect markers, such as save (habitual) and pinis (completive), are
also not found in PNGE (A.-M. Smith, 1988b). Even the bin past marker, a recent TP
innovation with a form derived from English, does not have parallel usage in PNGE.
In fact, in terms of structure, PNGE is more similar to other indigenized varieties of
English than to TP. For example, it is characterized by variable grammatical marking
(based on English) in the NP and VP, regularization of plurals in mass and count nouns,
and the use of progressive aspect with stative verbs:

I ask him to come yesterday (A.-M. Smith 1988a: 303)

When our homeworks were not done . . . (A.-M. Smith 1978: 36)
Now we are knowing about the continuous tenses (A.-M. Smith 1978: 21)

Also, there are some specific features of PNGE found in other indigenized varieties but
not in TP for example, the use of already to show completion and use to for present
habitual, as in Singapore English (Platt et al., 1984: 71):

Singapore English: You finish makan already? (Have you already eaten?)
PNGE: She finish already (A.-M. Smith, 1988b: 133)
Singapore English: She use(d) to go to Pulau Tikus market (she still does)
PNGE: You use to look at these things carefully, but me I don't (A.-M. Smith, 1988b: 126)

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

196 Jeff Siegel

3.4 Code-switching
Frequent code-switching between TP and English has been described by Muhlhausler
(1982, 1985a, 1991) and Romaine (1989b, 1992). Code-switching, following Clyne (1987:
740), refers to changing from one grammatical system to another, as opposed to transfer-
ence or nonce borrowing (mentioned above), which do not involve changing systems.
An example of TP-English code-switching is given below a conversation transcribed
from a documentary film, Cowboy and Maria in Town. As in most cases, it is easy to
determine which grammatical system is being used. Here both TP (in italics) and English
are given in standard orthography, ignoring phonological peculiarities. Translations of the
TP are given in square brackets. As in the example of transference above, English lexical
items used within the TP system are written in small italic capitals. Items that could belong
to either system are written in large capitals.
Speaker 1: Government tell us they got no money. They just tell us every stories it's nothing.
You see, too many education people are here form one up to form two, three no
job you see.
Speaker 2: Tumbuna bilong yu i gat nem long ples, oke yu gat graun bilong yu. Yu mas ting . . . yu
mas save dispela. [If your ancestors are known in the village, then you have your own
land. You must think . . . you must know this.]
Speaker 3: (unclear) toktok em i tru ya. [What he said is true.]
Speaker 2: Lukim, yumi gat, yumi gat papa gat tumbuna na yumi kamap, a? Oke, yupela tumbuna
bilong mama i stap, em ples bilong yu tu, olsem papa bilong mama bilong yu. Taim yumi
stap long Mosbi na lukim. Mi tu mi save pilim sampela taim. Olsem mi maritman olsem,
mi gat pikinini tu, a? [Look, we have fathers and grandfathers and then we're born, eh?
Okay, there's your mother's predecessors, that's your place too, like your mother's
father. We stay in Port Moresby now and look! I also feel it some time. Like, I'm a
married man; I've got kids too, eh?]
Speaker 4: Na yu tu yu maritman yu mas go long ples ya! [And you're a married man so you should
go back to the village!]
Speaker 2: Yupela ya you living on people's land.
Speaker 5: Oh no way, who will pay the bloody fuckin' wanem [what].
Speaker 2: Okay, then you see, then yu lukim if mi kisim ol lain Rigo na go slip long Kainantu haus
lain bilong yu, bai yu tok wanem? Get out! It's not your land. Yumi tok ol Papua bilong
sarim maus ya. Yu gat graun, yu planim kaikai, yu wok long gaden, salim long maket.
[. . . you see, if I take Rigo people and go and stay at your Kainantu clan's place, what
will you say? Get out? It's not your land. We tell Papuans to keep quiet. You have
land, you plant food, you work in the garden, sell it at the market.]
Speaker 4: Gavman bai i baim. [The government will buy it.]
Speaker 2: Ples i go desert nau. I no longtaim after one hundred years time bai yu lukim ol
maunten olsem haus stanap haus stanap. [The place is turning into a desert. It won't be
long . . . you'll see these hills will just have houses standing on them.] So, fellows, go
back home and start a garden or a coffee garden, a?
(unclear dialogue)
Speaker 2: COFFEE GARDEN i stap yu givim fertilizer na em nambatu bai i kamap. [As for the
coffee garden, you give it fertilizer and it will be great.]
Conversational code-switching (and transference) is common in PNG, and many
examples have been recorded not only between TP and English, but between TP and
other languages, such as Gapun, Buang and Kaiep. Here are some examples:
Gapun-TP (Kulick and Stroud, 1990: 210, 212):

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 197

Mi magawna. Yu go pastaim. Nd kawO amana.

`You go. You go then. Put that thing there.'
Painimn wanem samting long sapwar bilong mi.
`What are you looking for in my basket?'

Buang-TP (Sankoff, 1976: 303):

au ti modo bai ol i kot stret long yu.
`If you're the only one sitting down (i.e., doing nothing), they'll take you straight to court.'

Kaiep-TP (Ross, 1985: 549):

Karok no ai wantaim gia.
`Only Karok lives with me.'

With regard to TP and English, Muhlhausler (1985a: 132) points out that code-switching
usually occurs at grammatical boundaries. In an earlier work (1982: 455), he concludes:
`That code-switching can be pinpointed is an indication that one is not dealing with a post-
pidgin continuum.' This data backs up his conclusion.
Since in this and later works (e.g., 1985a, 1986), Muhlhausler refers to the post-pidgin
stage of development in TP, while at the same time saying that `no continuum intermediate
between Tok Pisin and English has yet emerged' (1982: 454), it is clear that his definition of
`post-pidgin' does not necessarily involve a post-pidgin continuum. In fact, he equates
post-pidgin TP to an urban sociolect (1982: 454). In this way, his definitions of post-pidgin
differs from that of post-creole, which clearly involves the existence of a post-creole
continuum (DeCamp, 1971: 371).

3.5 Intermediate forms

While Muhlhausler (1985a: 147) claims that `there is no continuum of constructions
intermediate between English and Tok Pisin,' Romaine (1992: 321) refers to `intermediate
varieties' of TP and English resulting from code-switching. As already mentioned, she
concludes (323): `The existence of these intermediate varieties is a sign that decreolization
is already advanced in urban areas like Lae.' However, closer examination of her examples
(322) reveals that they are not really intermediate varieties but utterances in which some
lexical forms and structures could be either Tok Pisin or English. For example, what
Romaine gives as Who sa/husa(t) kisim brown? `Who gets the brown [crayon]?' could have
two possible interpretations, shown here with the conventions used earlier in this article:
Who sa kisim brown ?
Husa(t) kisim brown ?

Thus, while it is sometimes difficult to determine exactly where code-switching or

transference may be occurring, there is not necessarily a mixing of grammatical forms from
two systems. Also, it is noteworthy that all these examples come from schoolchildren who
have recently been exposed to English and who have possibly not yet separated the codes
properly.
With regard to Tok Pisin, then, there are no intermediate forms of the type we find in
typical post-pidgin/creole continua. Thus, while there may be a continuum between rural
and urban sociolects within Tok Pisin, as well as a continuum within PNG English, the two
systems have retained their separate identity and there is no evidence of a continuum

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

198 Jeff Siegel

between them, especially in grammatical areas. The extensive restructuring which normally
defines post-pidgins/creoles has not occurred in PNG. While there is certainly evidence of
the influence of English among educated speakers of Tok Pisin, it is mainly in the lexicon.
Variation among Tok Pisin speakers has to do with the degree of bilingualism and the
amount of transference and code-switching between the systems.

3.6 Other Melanesian countries

With regard to the Solomon Islands, Watson-Gegeo (1987: 28) mentions that urban
Pijin may be decreolizing, and gives some examples of lexical differences between urban
and rural varieties. However, Jourdan (1989) comes to a different conclusion. She observes
(33) that `heavy code-switching' to English frequently occurs in speech of bilingual urban
speakers of Pijin, but it has not affected the structure of Pijin. Like that of Tok Pisin, the
major source of syntactic expansion in Pijin is not English but its own internal resources.
Using examples from texts similar to those above for TP, Jourdan clearly illustrates the
following point (34): `Code-switching is the most striking aspect of the influence of English
on Pijin. The degree of code-switching varies among bilingual Pijin speakers.' She
concludes that this influence `does not mean decreolization, or development of a post-
creole continuum.'
There is also some disagreement about the situation in Vanuatu. Charpentier (1984)
describes the depidginization of Bislama since independence, and predicts its eventual
displacement by a local variety of English. However, Tyron (1986) believes that an
anglicized urban Bislama and the more conservative rural Bislama will be maintained as
separate registers. On the other hand, Thomas (1990: 251) points out that Charpentier's
examples are mainly of `careless ``translationese'' found in the Government newspaper.'
He also describes research which disconfirms the alleged comprehension gap between
anglicized urban and rural varieties of Bislama. Thomas summarizes the situation as
follows (249):

[M]y own observations would suggest a narrowing of the gap between `rural' and `urban' Bislama.
It is undeniable that the better educated social group uses a more Anglicized form of Bislama, but
it would be an over-simplification to assume that increasing contact with English will make
Bislama more like English. The presence in Vanuatu of a significant minority of Bislama/French
bilinguals should ensure that the conditions required for the development of a post-creole
Bislama/English continuum are not met.

This observation is backed up by an examination of recent developments in Bislama

grammar and lexicon, described by Crowley (1990a: 32168). Grammatical expansion is
again derived from the internal resources of the language, not restructuring due to pressure
from English.

4. SOCIO-CULTURAL AND POLITICAL FACTORS

Since the evidence presented so far shows that there is no pidgin-to-English continuum
in Melanesia, the question arises as to why this is so when continua do supposedly exist in
other places with apparently similar sociolinguistic conditions. In this section I will try to
answer this question looking at two closely related factors: the distinctiveness of MP and
English in Melanesia, and the status of MP.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 199

4.1 Distinctiveness
As mentioned before, in the 1970s Sankoff (1976: 308) pointed out that `the distinction
between Tok Pisin and English is still very clear.' The reasons for this distinction have to
do with the history of the functions and development of the language. Hall (1966: 135)
describes how in New Guinea, ever since German rule in the late nineteenth century, `the
government has shown little or no discrimination against Pidgin, and has been forced to
admit its use, in written as well as spoken form.' The development of Tok Pisin into a
written language, to be utilized by Melanesian speakers, was initiated in the 1920s by
Catholic missionaries, who realized that it was not merely broken English but an
independent language (Siegel, 1985: 518). The Catholic, Methodist and Lutheran missions
began publishing work in TP in the 1930s. During the Second World War, Tok Pisin was
used for mass communication, when both the Japanese and the Allies used it in
propaganda pamphlets dropped by airplanes all over New Guinea (520).
Thus, when more widespread education in English began after the war, Tok Pisin was
already established as a distinct language with its own writing system. Muhlhausler (1985a:
131) describes how the two languages maintained their distinctiveness.
In the case of Tok Pisin and English, the fact that English was taught in most parts of Papua New
Guinea after the Second World War was not a significant linguistic influence on Tok Pisin, since
the two languages remained separate, the former in the classroom and a very small set of official
transactions, the latter in all other spheres of non-traditional life, with the local vernaculars
continuing to be used for traditional contexts.

This distinctiveness of MP has been maintained to this day in all three Melanesian
countries by a variety of factors. The first is standardization and the availability of
textbooks and dictionaries in all three varieties (e.g., Mihalic, 1971; Simons and Young,
1978; Crowley, 1990b). Second is the continued use of MP alongside English in radio
broadcasting in all three countries and in newspapers and government publications in
PNG and Vanuatu. Third is the continued separation in other important contexts,
especially religion. Church services are generally held in MP in urban areas, and
translations of the New Testament of the Bible exist in all three dialects of MP.
In addition, there has been a conscious effort by some, especially in PNG, to maintain the
distinction between MP and English. For example, the policy of the Tok Pisin weekly
newspaper, Wantok, has been to use the more conservative rural sociolect rather than the
more anglicized urban sociolect (Siegel, 1985: 531). In fact, many complaints about
anglicized MP or the mixing of MP and English have been reported from speakers of all
three varieties (Muhlhausler, 1979: 151; Romaine, 1992: 325; Jourdan, 1990: 1745; Thomas,
1990: 250). Here is an example from a letter published in Wantok (Siegel, 1983: 83):
Planti bilong mipela bilong Papua Niugini i save gut tru long pisin, tasol i no save long tok inglis
liklik. Planti taim mi save harim long redio olsem, planti man husat i bin skul long inglis i save
miksim tok inglis wantaim tok pisin.
Long dispela tasol, planti man long hap bilong mipela i save paul tru. Na tu planti bilong ol i no
save harim na kisim gut wanem samting ol i toktok long en long redio.
Olsem na mobeta ol redio anaunsa o ol manmeri husat i bin skul long tok inglis, i tingting gut
pastaim na bihain toktok long pablik ples. Sapos wanpela brata oi susa i save gut long tok pisin, na tu
yu save yusim ol hatpela inglis yu mas tinting gut na yu no ken paulim man neks taim.
A lot of us in Papua New Guinea know Tok Pisin well but don't know English even a little. Many
times I hear on the radio many people who mix English with Tok Pisin.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

200 Jeff Siegel

Because of this many people from our area get really confused. And many of them don't
understand well what they're talking about on the radio.
So, it would be better if the radio announcers or people who have learned English think before
talking in public. If you're a brother or sister who knows Tok Pisin well and you use hard English,
you should think carefully and not confuse people next time.

4.2 Status
As already stated, MP has official status only in Vanuatu, where, according to the
constitution, Bislama is the national language, as well as an official language along with
English and French. However, the Solomon Islands National Literacy Committee (1992:
3) recommends that Pijin should be adopted as the national language of the country. The
PNG government remains hesitant to give any official support to Tok Pisin.
In none of the countries is MP an official educational language, but its use in education
is widespread. The Solomon Islands National Literacy Committee (1992: 6) notes that
Pijin is the de facto medium of instruction in most primary schools and recommends that it
should become the official medium. In Vanuatu, Bislama is used in primary and pre-school
teacher training (Crowley, 1990c: 1314) and is the medium of instruction in both the
Police and Marine Training Schools (Asian Development Bank/Australia Development
Assistance Bureau Joint Technical Assistance Team, 1987). Bislama has also been the
subject of study and medium of instruction for a second-year level university course at the
University of the South Pacific (Crowley, 1990c: 1213).
In PNG, Tok Pisin is widely used in church education programs and in the more recent
Tok Ples (vernacular) Pre-school programs (Siegel, 1993: 3034). In 1991, hundreds of
community-based pre-schools had been established, teaching initial literacy in over 90
languages. The third most popular language to be chosen by communities was Tok Pisin
with over 1,600 students (Bob Litteral, personal communication, 1992). And recently, a
linguistics MA thesis on Tok Pisin grammar has been written in Tok Pisin.
This informal, functional status of MP both reflects and enhances the positive attitudes
people have toward the language. Another source of positive attitudes is related to the role
of MP as a language of unity and solidarity, as well as an important symbol of national
identity in each Melanesian country. Crowley (1990c) describes the importance of Bislama
as the language of national unity in Vanuatu. Jourdan (1990: 177) illustrates how Pijin has
more recently become `the symbol and cradle of new Melanesian aspirations and
identities.' And Wurm (1985: 73) notes that many Papua New Guineans `look upon
Tok Pisin as a means for their self-identification as a language which is their own and a
distinguishing feature of all that is Papua New Guinean' (see also Kale, 1990).
Although many people, especially in PNG and the Solomon Islands, do have ambivalent
views toward MP in comparison with English (Muhlhausler, 1985a: 131; Romaine, 1992:
331; Watson-Gegeo, 1987: 28), these attitudes do not appear to be the result of elitism. This
observation is backed up by a survey of the use of TP and English among university students,
done in 1984 and 1986 (Swan and Lewis, 1990). The results show the following (2245):

There is no sign that present undergraduates are adopting English as their `language of preference'
(whether for prestige or practical reasons) . . . There is no sign of antipathy to Tok Pisin.

A survey of Solomon Islands and Vanuatu students at the University of the South Pacific
in Fiji (Wale, 1992) also shows similar attitudes: 87 percent of the respondents report that

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 201

they are proud to be `Pidgin speakers' and 93 percent indicate they are not ashamed to
speak MP in the presence of `non-Pidgin speakers.'

4.3 Conclusion
The codification of the different dialects of MP and the expansion of their use into many
important domains have kept them distinct from English as well as given them status as
languages of national identity. These factors have prevented the development of a pidgin-
to-English continuum in Melanesia.

5. IMPLICATIONS
The situation in Melanesia clearly does not support the classic `life-cycle' view of pidgin/
creole development (Hall, 1966). Even though Melanesian Pidgin continues to coexist with
its lexifier, English, and its speakers have access to English through the education system,
extensive depidginization (or decreolization) has not occurred. In other words, the
development of a post-pidgin (or post-creole) continuum has not taken place in spite of
the ideal sociolinguistic conditions for this next stage of the proposed life-cycle.
The absence of extensive depidginization or decreolization in Melanesia may also support
the view that a post-creole continuum is not the result of decreolization, but reflects a
spectrum of variation that has existed since much earlier stages of development (Alleyne,
1971; LePage, 1977). There is no historical evidence of such variation in Melanesia
(although it may have existed in Australia, where Melanesian Pidgin began to stabilize
on the sugarcane plantations, and where contact between English-speakers and indentured
Melanesians was more extensive). Thus, according to this view, we would not expect to find
a pidgin-to-English continuum in Melanesia because there never has been one.

NOTES
1. I would like to thank Terry Crowley, Diana Eades, Libby Fitzgerald, John Lynch and Geoff Smith for helpful
comments and suggestion on earlier drafts of this article.
2. Fiji is on the borderline between Melanesia and Polynesia, not only according to geography but also in terms of
culture, language and racial characteristics (Bellwood, 1979). For the purpose of this paper, however, it is
included in Melanesia.
3. Another pidgin language, but with an Austronesian lexifier, Hiri (or Police) Motu, was also widely used as a
lingua franca in the southern part of the country, but since independence, it is being displaced by Tok Pisin,
especially in urban areas such as the capital, Port Moresby (Siegel, 1992).
4. Tyron and Hackman (1983) give the figure of 63 languages, but the national census of 1976 lists 87 (Watson-
Gegeo, 1987: 31 n).
5. Even in only English-educated company, Bislama is still preferred. Among the French-educated, the use of
French is also rare, but more common than English among the English-educated.
6. Although many scholars (e.g. Mufwene, [1988] ) point out that there are no linguistic differences between
creoles and expanded pidgins, there are differences in both their functional use and their susceptibility to
influences from other languages. Jamaican Creole, for example, is the primary language of nearly all its
speakers, and is transmitted and acquired as their first language. On the other hand, Melanesian Pidgin is the
primary language of only a minority of its speakers and acquired as a second language by the majority. Thus,
Tok Pisin is susceptible to substrate influence (from the first language of its speakers), whereas Jamaican
Creole is not. Expanded pidgins, then, are still very much contact varieties, whereas creoles are not.

REFERENCES
Aitchison, Jean (1981) Language Change: Progress or Decay. London: Fontana Paperbacks.
Alleyne, Mervyn C. (1971) Acculturation and the cultural matrix of creolization. Pidginization and Creolization of
Languages. Edited by Dell Hymes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 17986.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

202 Jeff Siegel

Appel, Rene and Muysken, Pieter (1987) Language Contact and Bilingualism. London: Edward Arnold.
Asian Development Bank/Australia Development Assistance Bureau Joint Technical Assistance Team (1987)
Vocational Training and the Labour Market in Vanuatu (Asian Development Bank, T.A. No. 810-VAN
Vocational Training Project).
Bailey, Richard W. and Gorlach, Manfred (eds.) (1982) English as a World Language. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press.
Baldauf, Richard and Luke, Allan (eds.) (1990) Language Planning and Education in Australasia and the South
Pacific. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bellwood, Peter (1979) Man's Conquest of the Pacific: The Prehistory of Southeast Asia and Oceania. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Bickerton, Derek (1975a) Dynamics of a Creole System. London: Cambridge University Press.
Bickerton, Derek (1975b) Can English and Pidgin be kept apart? In McElhanon (1975: 2127).
Bokamba, Eyamba G. (1991) West Africa. In Cheshire (1991: 493508).
Charpentier, Jean-Michel (1984) Le pidgin Bichelmar avant et apres l'independence de Vanuatu. York Papers in
Linguistics, 11, 5161.
Cheshire, Jenny (ed.) (1991) English around the World. Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Clyne, Michael (1987) Constraints on code-switching: how universal are they? Linguistics, 25, 73964.
Crowley, Terry (1989) English in Vanuatu. World Englishes, 8, 3746.
Crowley, Terry (1990a) Beach-la-Mar to Bislama: The Emergence of a National Language in Vanuatu. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Crowley, Terry (1990b) An Illustrated Bislama-English and English-Bislama Dictionary. Vila: Pacific Languages
Unit and Vanuatu Extension Centre, University of the South Pacific.
Crowley, Terry (1990c) The position of Melanesian Pidgin in Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea. In Verhaar (1990:
118).
Crowley, Terry (1992) An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. 2nd edition. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
DeCamp, David (1971) Toward a generative analysis of a post-creole continuum. In Pidginization and Creoliza-
tion of Languages. Edited by Dell Hymes: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 34970.
Fasold, Ralph (1984) The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Geraghty, Paul (1977) Fiji Pidgin and bilingual education. Fiji English Teachers Journal, 12, 28.
Geraghty, Paul (1984) Language Policy in Fiji and Rotuma. In Duivosavosa: Fiji's Languages: Their Use and Their
Future. (Bulletin of the Fiji Museum no. 8). Suva: Fiji Museum, pp. 3284.
Hall, Robert, A. (1955) Innovations in Melanesian Pidgin (Neo-Melanesian) Oceania, 26, 91109.
Hall, Robert, A. (1966) Pidgin and Creole Languages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Harkins, Jean (1994) Bridging Two Worlds: Aboriginal English and Crosscultural Understanding. St. Lucia:
University of Queensland Press.
Holzknecht, Suzanne (1989) Sociolinguistic analysis of a register: birthday notices in Papua New Guinea Post
Courier. World Englishes, 8, 17992.
Jourdan, Christine (1989) Nativization and anglicization in Solomon Islands Pijin. World Englishes, 8, 2535.
Jourdan, Christine (1990) Solomon Pijin: an unrecognized national language. In Baldauf and Luke (1990: 16681).
Kale, Joan (1990) Language planning and the language of education in Papua New Guinea. In Baldauf and Luke
(1990: 106260).
Kulick, Don and Stroud, Christopher (1990) Code-switching in Gapun: social and linguistic aspects of language
use in a language shifting community. In Verhaar (1990:20534).
LePage, Robert (1977) Processes of pidginization and creolization. In Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Edited by
Albert Valdman. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press. pp. 2255.
Lynch, John (1979) Changes in Tok Pisin morphology. Paper presented at the 13th Congress of the Linguistic
Society of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby. (To appear in Melanesian Pidgin and Tok Pisin, Volume 2. Edited
by John W. M. Verhaar and Nicholas Faraclas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)
McElhanon, Kenneth A. (ed.) (1975) Tok Pisin i Go We? (Kivung Special Publication 1) Port Moresby: Linguistic
Society of Papua New Guinea.
Meijer, Guus and Muysken, Pieter (1977) On the beginnings of pidgin and creole studies: Schuchardt and Hesseling.
In Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Edited by Albert Valdman. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp. 2145.
Mihalic, F. (1971) The Jacaranda Dictionary and Grammar of Melanesian Pidgin. Milton, QLD: Jacaranda Press.
Moag, Rodney F. (1982) The life-cycle of non-native Englishes: a case study. In The Other Tongue: English across
Cultures. Edited by Braj B. Kachru. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Pres. pp. 27088.
Mufwene, Salikoko, S. (1988) English pidgins: form and function. World Englishes, 7, 25567.
Muhlhausler, Peter (1975) Sociolects in New Guinea Pidgin. In McElhanon (1975: 5975).
Muhlhausler, Peter (1979) Growth and Structure of the Lexicon of New Guinea Pidgin. Canberra; Pacific
Linguistics C-52.
Muhlhausler, Peter (1980) Structural expansion and the process of creolization. In Theoretical Orientations in
Creole Studies. Edited by Albert Valdman and Arnold Highfield. New York: Academic Press. pp. 1955.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

Pidgin and English in Melanesia: is there a continuum? 203

Muhlhausler, Peter (1982) Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea. In Bailey and Gorlach (1982: 43966).
Muhlhausler, Peter (1985a) Internal development of Tok Pisin. In Wurm and Muhlhausler (1985: 75166).
Muhlhausler, Peter (1985b) Variation in Tok Pisin. In Wurm and Muhlhausler (1985: 23373).
Muhlhausler, Peter (1986) Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Muhlhausler, Peter (1991) Watching girls pass by in Tok Pisin. In Cheshire (1991: 63746).
Nekitel, Otto M. (1990) The role and use of language in Papua New Guinea's trilingual parliament: a synopsis of
success and constraints. Unpublished paper, Language and Literature Department: University of Papua New
Guinea.
O'Donnell, W. R. and Todd, Loreto (1980) Variety in Contemporary English. London: Allen & Unwin.
Platt, John, Weber, Heidi and Ho Mian Lian (1984) The New Englishes. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Romaine, Suzanne (1988) Pidgin and Creole Languages. London: Longman.
Romaine, Suzanne (1989a) English and Tok Pisin (New Guinea Pidgin English) in Papua New Guinea. World
Englishes, 8, 523.
Romaine, Suzanne (1989b) Bilingualism. Oxford: Blackwell.
Romaine, Suzanne (1991) The Pacific. In Cheshire (1991: 61936).
Romaine, Suzanne (1992) Language, Education and Development: Urban and Rural Tok Pisin in Papua New
Guinea. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Ross, Malcolm (1985) Effects of Tok Pisin on some vernacular languages. In Wurm and Muhlhausler (19985:
53956).
Sankoff, Gillian (1976) Political power and linguistic inequality in Papua New Guinea. In Language and Politics.
Edited by William M. O'Barr and Jean F. O'Barr. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 283310.
Sankoff, Gillian (1977) Creolization and syntactic change in New Guinea Tok Pisin. In Sociocultural Dimensions
of Language Change. Edited by Ben G. Blount and Mary Sanchez. New York: Academic Press. pp. 11030.
Scorza, David and Franklin, Karl J. (1989) An Advanced Course in Tok Pisin. Ukarumpa, PNG: SIL.
Siegel, Jeff (1981) Developments in written Tok Pisin. Anthropological Linguistics, 23, 2035.
Siegel, Jeff (1983) Media Tok Pisin. In Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics no. 3. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics
A-65, 8192.
Siegel, Jeff (1985) Tok Pisin in the Mass Media. In Wurm and Muhlhausler (1985: 51733).
Siegel, Jeff (1986) Pidgin English in Fiji: a sociolinguistic history. Pacific Studies, 9, 53106.
Siegel, Jeff (1987) Language Contact in a Plantation Environment: A Sociolinguistic History of Fiji. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Siegel, Jeff (1989) English in Fiji. World Englishes, 8, 4758.
Siegel, Jeff (1991) Variation in Fiji English. In Cheshire (1991: 66474).
Siegel, Jeff (1992) The future of Tok Pisin: another look. In The Language Game: Papers in Memory of Donald C.
Laycock. Edited by Tom Dutton, Malcolm Ross and Darrell Tyron. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics C-110.
pp. 4058.
Siegel, Jeff (1993) Pidgins and creoles in education in Australia and the southwest Pacific. In Atlantic meets
Pacific: A Global View of Pidginization and Creolization. Edited by Francis Byrne and John Holm. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins. pp. 299308.
Siegel, Jeff (1994) Review of Language, Education and Development: Urban and Rural Tok Pisin in Papua New
Guinea by Suzanne Romaine. Language in Society, 23, 14449.
Simons, Linda and Young, Hugh (1978) Pijin blong yumi: A Guide to Solomon Islands Pijin. Honiara: Solomon
Islands Christian Association.
Smith, Anne-Marie (1978) The Papua New Guinea Dialect of English. ERU Research Report No. 25. Port
Moresby: University of Papua New Guinea.
Smith, Anne-Marie (1988a) The use of aspect in Papua New Guinea English. In Asian-Pacific Papers (Occasional
Papers No. 10). Edited by Brian McCarthy. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. pp. 10934.
Smith, Anne-Marie (1988b) English in Papua New Guinea. World Englishes, 7, 299308.
Smith, Geoff P. (1986) A Preliminary Investigation of the Spoken Tok Pisin of some Urban Children in Lae and
Goroka. (Department of Language and Communication Studies Research Report No. 10) Lae: PNG University
of Technology.
Smith, Geoff (1990) Idiomatic Tok Pisin and referential adequacy. In Verhaar (1990: 27587).
Smith, Geoff (1994) Husat i bin orthoraizim?: New verbs in Manus Tok Pisin. Paper presented at the 7th
International Conference of the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, Georgetown, Guyana.
Solomon Islands National Literacy Committee (1992) A Survey of Literacy and Language, MarchNovember
1991. Honiara: National Literacy Committee and Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development.
Swan, John and Lewis, Don J. (1990) Tok Pisin at university: an Educational and language planning dilemma in
Papua New Guinea? In Baldauf and Luke (1990: 21033).
Thomas, Andrew (1990) Language planning in Vanuatu. In Baldauf and Luke (1990: 23458).
Todd, Loreto (1982) The English language in West Africa. In Bailey and Gorlach (1982: 281305).
Tyron, D. T. (1986) Neologisms in Bislama (Vanuatu) in The Fergusonian Impact. Volume 2: Sociolinguistics and
the Sociology of Language. Edited by Joshua A. Fishman et al. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 30513.

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997

d:/weng/16-2/25-2.3d 4/9/97 10:13 tm/mp

204 Jeff Siegel

Tyron, D. T. and Hackmann, B. D. (1983) Solomon Islands Languages: An Internal Classification. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics C-72.
Verhaar, John W. M. (ed.) (1990) Melanesian Pidgin and Tok Pisin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wale, Roslyn (1992) A survey and use of attitudes towards Melanesian Pidgin of the Wantok student population
at the University of the South Pacific, Laucala campus. typescript.
Watson-Gegeo, Karen Ann (1987) English in the Solomon Islands. World Englishes, 6, 2132.
Watson-Gegeo, Karen Ann (1989) Introduction: English in the South Pacific. World Englishes, 8, 13.
Wurm, S. A. (1971) Pidgins, creoles and lingue franche. In Current Trends in Linguistics, Volume 8: Linguistics in
Oceania. Edited by Thomas A. Seboek. The Hague: Mouton. pp. 9991021.
Wurm, S. A. (1985) The status of Tok Pisin and attitudes towards it. In Wurm and Muhlhausler (1985: 6574).
Wurm, S. A. and Muhlhausler, P. (eds.) (1985) Handbook of Tok Pisin (New Guinea Pidgin). Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics C-70.
Yarupawa, Shem (1986) Milne Bay Informal Variety of English (Department of Language and Communication
Studies Research Report No. 9) Lae: PNG University of Technology.

(Received 12 December 1996)

A Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1997