Diversity and complexity in the typology of syllables in Creole languages

Thomas B. Klein

Georgia Southern University

Department of Writing & Linguistics
P.O. Box 8026
Statesboro, GA 30458
USA
+1-912-681-0986
tklein@georgiasouthern.edu
www.georgiasouthern.edu/~tklein
 Diversity and complexity in the typology of syllables in Creole languages

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis and systematic survey of types of syllables based on a
typological sample of 23 Creole languages. Onsets, codas and the occurrence of the
syllable types V, CV, CVC, VC, CCV, CCVC, CVCC, VCC and CCVCC are
investigated based on data from Atlantic, African, Asian and Pacific Creoles with
European and non-European lexifier languages. In this strictly synchronic approach, it is
found that no Creole has exclusively CV syllables, that the syllable inventories of Creole
languages are diverse and that they may exhibit considerable complexity. It is shown that
the most common syllable template in Creole languages is (C) (C) V (C). These results
have important implications for the understanding of Creole syllables because most views
of syllable typology in Creole languages are grounded in the idea that simple CV
syllables are dominant. Instead, Creole languages center on a medium degree of
complexity in terms of the inventory of syllables they allow.

Introduction

Surveys of the structure of Creole languages have maintained that CV syllables, that is,
open syllables consisting of a vowel preceded by a consonant, are dominant in the
prosodic structure of these languages (e.g. Bartens 1995, Holm 2000, Kaye & Tosco
2001, Romaine 1988). It has even been claimed that CV syllables are the only type
occurring in Creole languages.

"Creoles have no initial or final consonant clusters. They have a simple syllable
structure which consists of alternating consonants and vowels, e.g. CVCV."
(Romaine 1988: 63)

The alleged preference for CV syllables is taken to be the root cause for phonological
restructuring in superstrate words. Processes of vowel insertion, consonant deletion or
metathesis may indeed conspire to produce Creole forms that are more CV-like than the
corresponding items in European superstrate languages. The restructuring seen in (1)
results in Creole words with exclusively CV syllables.

(1) Creole form Etymon Language

kupa ocupar Príncipe
sisa sister Sranan
kini knie Negerhollands
pilime plume Mauritian
sukú oscuro, escuro Papiamentu
(Data from Holm 2000: 141 ff.)

Words with divergent syllable types, in particular involving complex onsets and codas,
have generally been treated as late or decreolized additions to the lexicon of a given

1
Creole language (e.g. Alleyne 1980, Boretzky 1983, Mühlhäusler 1997). Recent research,
however, has shown that even languages considered radical Creoles like Saramaccan and
Sranan have syllables with complex onsets in the earliest stages of their formation.
Examples shared by Early Saramaccan and Early Sranan are smoko ‘smoke’ and srepi
‘self’. In addition to CCV syllables, Early St. Kittian and Early Jamaican also routinely
allow for syllable codas, as in lib ‘live’ and pass ‘past’. This evidence is important in the
present context because it refutes the global idea that complex Creole syllables are
necessarily the result of later developments or decreolization. In other words, there is
strong evidence that the tendency towards CV word structure may have developed over
time, at least in the Suriname Creoles (Aceto 1996, Plag & Schramm, forthcoming; cf.
Mühlhäusler 1997: 189).
A closer look at the evidence reveals that syllable types other than CV are attested
even in items that have been subject to phonological restructuring and in Creole
languages that are claimed to be influenced by the CV pattern.

(2) Non-CV syllable Creole form Etymon Language

(a) a V álima alma Príncipe
(b) flo CCV konofló knoflook Papiamentu
gro CCV groto groot Negerhollands
wro CCV wroko work Sranan
(Data from Holm 2000: 141 ff.)
(c) ret CVC sitiret straight Tok Pisin
(Example from Sebba 1997: 110)

The evidence in (2) shows that phonological restructuring in Creole languages does not
uniformly result in CV syllables. Instead, restructured words may contain onsetless
syllables, closed syllables or open syllables with complex onsets. This evidence suggests
that syllable structures across Creole languages are significantly more varied than
commonly assumed. This idea is supported by observations in the literature that certain
Creole languages fail to exhibit any significant tendency towards CV structure. Atlantic
French-lexified Creoles have been cited in this context (e.g. Holm 2000, McWhorter
2000, Parkvall 2000). Codas and consonant clusters may be found in other Creoles
languages as well. For instance, Negerhollands routinely tolerates onset clusters and
obstruent codas as in forfluk ‘sly’ (Sabino 1990, 1993, Stolz 1986; see also Parkvall
2000).
Given that Creole syllable structure seems significantly more diverse than
previously assumed, the question arises as to what the actual syllable types of Creole
languages are. However, no systematic survey of the syllable typology of Creole
languages is available to date to address it. Few descriptive works of individual Creole
languages such as Carrington 1984 and Stolz 1986 provide detailed analyses of syllable
types. Linguists have no general source to glean the syllable typology of Creole
languages. This is a significant shortcoming given the importance of Creole syllable
structure in discussions of substrate influence, diachronic development, decreolization,
synchronic simplicity and uniformity, among other issues. Thus, it is important to
develop and implement a survey and analysis of the synchronic syllable types of Creole
languages based on objective criteria.

2
 It has been argued recently that the synchronic grammars of Creole languages are
in some significant sense simple in comparison to the grammars of non-Creole languages
(McWhorter 2001). This Creole simplicity hypothesis has not been tested with data from
syllable structure. It is not possible at this point to compare a sufficiently rich sample of
the syllable structure of non-Creole languages with the present sample of Creole
languages. No comprehensive typological database and analysis of non-Creole syllables
comparable to, for instance, Maddieson’s (1984) work on consonants and vowels is
available. Given that it appears that the syllable structure of Creole languages is richer
than previously thought, it is possible to test the Creole simplicity hypothesis by looking
at just the set of attested inventories of syllable types in Creole languages. If the
phonology of Creole languages was indeed overwhelmingly simple, we would expect to
find a significant majority of simple syllable type inventories, perhaps similar to the CV
dominance claimed in earlier works. It will be shown in the course of this paper that this
prediction of the Creole simplicity hypothesis is not confirmed. Instead, significant
evidence is uncovered to support the idea that the synchronic syllable typology of Creole
languages tends to occupy middle ground in terms of complexity.
This paper takes seriously the idea of diversity in Creole syllable structure and
presents results of a systematic survey of synchronic syllable types based on a typological
sample of the world’s Creole languages. The remainder of the paper is structured as
follows. I show next how the present sample is constructed. Following this, basics of
syllable structure and syllable typology are laid out. The analysis of the database is
followed by a discussion of some of the implications of the results before conclusions are
offered. The appendix provides illustrative examples of the syllable types found in the
languages in the present sample.

Database of Creole languages

The present sample is constructed to represent the range of Creole languages around the
world. Care is taken to include Creoles from diverse locations and with European and
non-European lexifiers. This is done to ensure that generalizations are based on Creole
languages as a global phenomenon, not just a particular group of them. Following
Maddieson’s (1984) work on the typology of phonemic systems, a quota sample is
employed. The quota is to bring in two Creoles with the same or very similar lexifier
from a given geographical area wherever possible. The aim is to provide a balanced
sample, to enable sampling efficiency and to ensure maximal diversity of languages
while keeping the size of the database manageable.
Acrolectal Creoles, varieties or vocabulary are generally excluded. The reason is
that acrolectal material tends to be closest to the syllable structure of the corresponding
lexifier languages and is, hence, not indicative of Creole structures. The focus is on
mesolectal and basilectal varieties to make sure that distinctly Creole linguistic forms
make up as much of the database as possible. Recent additions to the lexicon of a given
Creole such as loanwords from European lexifiers have been avoided wherever they are
obvious or the sources identify them. For example, additions from Dutch to the lexicon of
Papiamentu or loans from Guyanese Creole English in the lexicon of Berbice have been
disregarded to focus on the core of these Creole languages rather than the periphery.

3
 There is also a bias towards the quality of the available descriptions. Creole
languages are chosen in part based on how detailed the information on the phonology and
word structure is in the sources and how reliable this information seems. Most
descriptions of individual Creole languages do not discuss syllable structure in great
detail. The necessary data to establish the range of syllable types in a given Creole
language must often be extracted from examples provided for other purposes or from
texts, glossaries or dictionaries. As much as possible, only words that appear
monomorphemic in the Creole languages are considered for the present analysis. Only
languages with sources cumulatively containing enough data represented in some sort of
phonetic representation could be considered for the present study.
The sample contains 23 Creole languages. Table 1 lays out how they are classified
according to geographic area and lexifier language. The sources for the data are identified
in the appendix. Note that the sample includes varieties that have only recently become
nativized as Creoles such as Tok Pisin and Sango.

Area IE-Lexifier Creole

Atlantic Dutch Negerhollands
Berbice
English Ndyuka
Saramaccan
French Haitian
St. Lucian
Portuguese Angolar
São Tomense
Spanish Papiamentu
Palenquero
Indian Ocean/ German Unserdeutsch
Pacific English Bislama
Tok Pisin
French Mauritian
Tayo
Portuguese Sri Lankan
Kristang
Spanish Zamboangueño
Ermitaño
Non-IE-Lexifier
Africa Bantu Kituba
Sango
Arabic Nubi
Asia Malay Baba Malay

Table 1. Creoles in sample

The lexifier languages are assigned the central role in classifying the Creoles in the
sample linguistically. The basic geographical division for Creoles with Indo-European
lexifier languages is between Atlantic creoles and the parts of the world delineated by the

4
Indian Ocean and the Pacific. The five European lexifier languages Dutch, English,
French, Portuguese and Spanish are easily matched with two Creoles each in the Atlantic
area. This is less straightforward for the Pacific Rim/Indian Ocean Creoles because there
is no Dutch-lexified Creole in this area. Rabaul Creole German (Unserdeutsch) takes the
place of a Dutch Creole here given that the lexifier languages are very closely related.
Creoles with non-Indo-European lexifiers are considered equally important for the
comprehensive understanding of Creole languages. They are classified geographically
according to the continent on which they are found. There is only one Arabic-lexified and
Malay-lexified Creole represented because of a lack of descriptive resources to extract
syllable structure information on other languages of this type.

Syllable structure and typology

For the purposes of this investigation, syllables are broadly defined descriptively as a
surface sequence of consonant (C) and vowel (V) units dominated by the constituents
onset, nucleus and coda. Only nuclei are obligatory, whereas all other units are optional,
as shown by parentheses, where appropriate. As an illustration, the syllable structure of
the Unserdeutsch word /traxt/ ‘dress’ is displayed in (3) (σ = syllable, O = onset, N =
nucleus, Cd = coda).

(3) σ

O N Cd

C C V C C

t r a x t

The sonority of the segments involved is a deciding factor in how they are arranged into
syllables. Vowels are most sonorous; glides, sonorants, fricatives and plosives decrease in
sonority, in that order. The nucleus is the sonority peak in a syllable, whereas segments
preceding and following the nucleus have progressively less sonority. In the structure in
(3), the peripheral plosive /t/ has the lowest sonority, the vowel peak /a/ has the highest,
and the non-peripheral consonants /r/ and /x/ have intermediate degrees of sonority. A
well-known complication in the relation between sonority and syllable structure concerns
clusters of /s/ or // followed by obstruents, which can be found in many European
languages. Against expectation, sonority does not progressively decrease towards the
edge of the syllable in these clusters. There has been a diversity of approaches to resolve
this issue in the phonological literature. Some researchers have argued that /s/ or // are
prespecified in onset position (e.g. Giegerich 1992), whereas others have maintained that
/s/ or // are adjoined to the onset node (see Kenstowicz 1994). For the purposes of this

5
paper, I assume that clusters of /s/ or // plus obstruent belong to the syllable onset
wherever feasible. Among the optional constituents of the syllable, onsets are more
important than codas. Following Kahn (1976), among others, onsets are maximal in that
making legitimate onsets has priority over forming a legitimate coda. As one result, VCV
sequences are syllabified as V.CV, where the dot indicates the syllable boundary. As
another consequence, complex onsets are formed word-internally at the expense of codas
if the complex onset can occur word-initially. However, complex onsets are not formed
word-internally if they cannot occur word-initially.
There is good reason to argue that the Arabic-lexified Creole Nubi presents an
instance of the situation just given. This language exhibits a rich array of word-internal
consonant sequences, but there are no corresponding word-initial clusters. For example,
given words such as /libra/ ‘needle’ and /asma/ ‘name’, one would expect words
beginning with br- and sm-. However, the only word-initial clusters found in Nubi are
instances of consonant plus w in a few words of African or unknown origin as in
/gwanda/ ‘cassava’ (see Heine 1982, Pasch & Thelwall 1987). If clusters such as br- and
sm- are analyzed as hetero-syllabic, even though the segments would fit into a single
onset according to their sonority profile, then the unexpected absence of word-initial
clusters can be accounted for. They are not licensed because clusters not involving /w/
are not allowed anywhere in the language. Thus, I propose that Nubi has essentially a (C)
V (C) syllable template like its lexifier Arabic (see Kenstowicz 1994 and references cited
there) and that words such as the ones above are syllabified as /lib.ra/ and /as.ma/,
respectively.
Across a variety of theoretical persuasions, the CV-phonology model (Clements
1990; Clements & Keyser 1983) and the parameter-based approach to syllable typology
in Blevins (1995) have been influential with researchers aiming to understand the
typology of surface syllables in the languages of the world. The core syllable typology in
the CV-phonology model in (4) may be seen as constrained variations of the prototypical
CV syllable. Note that each C and V can represent a potential cluster in this model.

(4) Core syllable typology (Clements 1990, Clements & Keyser 1983)

Type I: CV
Type II: CV, V
Type III: CV, CVC
Type IV: CV, V, CVC, VC

In type I, syllables must have onsets and must be open. Languages of type II prohibit
codas, but onsets are optional. Closed syllables are allowed in type III, and onsets are
obligatory. Type IV languages allow syllables without onsets as well as open and closed
syllables.
According to Blevins (1995), languages can be described in terms of a small set
of binary-valued parameters defined over the sub-syllabic constituents onset and coda.
The obligatory onset parameter determines whether an onset is required or not. The coda
parameter decides whether a language allows codas or not. The complex onset and
complex coda parameters determine whether a language does or does not allow complex

6
onsets or codas, respectively. Blevins (1995) also encodes edge effects, that is, the
occurrence of certain syllable types in peripheral versus medial position in the word.
Following Blevins’ distinction between simple and complex onsets and codas, I have
investigated the occurrence of the following syllable types in Creole languages: V, CV,
CVC, VC, CCV, CCVC, CVCC, VCC, and CCVCC.
Based on the set of potential surface syllable types and the settings for the four
syllable structure parameters, a language allowing only CV syllables shows the profile in
(5).

(5) Typological profile for CV language (cf. Blevins 1995)

(a) Syllable types

V CV CVC VC CCV CCVC CVCC VCC CCVCC

yes

(b) Parameter settings

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
yes no no no

Naturally, a strict CV language would only allow that syllable type, as in (5) (a). Only the
obligatory onset parameter would be set to ‘yes’, whereas all other parameters would be
switched off, as in (5) (b). This is a simple inventory by any measure. Note that most, if
not all, Creole languages should exhibit this profile, according to common wisdom in
much of linguistics. As shown below, this turns out to be a myth when confronted with
typological data from the world’s Creole languages.

Onsets

The investigation of Creole syllables may be approached by looking at onsets and codas
as distinct constituents. As far as onsets are concerned, the present investigation has
found that no Creole language in the sample requires them. In other words, Creoles allow
syllables with or without onsets. This is expressed as the generalization in (6).

(6) No Creole language requires syllable onsets.

Table 2 provides data for onsetless syllables from all of the Creoles in the sample. More
specifically, it provides examples for syllables consisting only of V in word-initial
position. Many Creole languages also allow VC syllables in word-initial position; some
even permit VCC syllables. Examples for such syllable types may be found in the
appendix. In Table 2 and below, glosses have been translated if the original language of
the source is not English. No gloss has been attempted if none could be found for a given
item in the source.

7
Negerhollands /ale:/ ‘alone’ /izu/ ‘iron’
Berbice /atriti/ ‘reverse’ /oboko/ ‘hen’
Ndyuka /agwado/ ‘stringed instrument’ /okoo/ ‘okra’
Saramaccan /eside/ ‘yesterday’ /oto/ ‘other’
Haitian /emab/ ‘amiable’ /ijen/ ‘hygiene’
St. Lucian /epi/ ‘with, and’ /ofe/ ‘to offer’
Angolar /abi/ ‘April’ /ome/‘human’
São Tomense /ami/ ‘I’ /ose/ ‘sky’
Papiamentu /iglesia/ ‘church’ /uzu/ no gloss given
Palenquero /abla/ ‘speak’ /uto/ no gloss given
Unserdeutsch /abn/ ‘evening’
Bislama /akis/ ‘axe’ /eli/ ‘early’
Tok Pisin /abris/ ‘go past’ /epa/ ‘stingray’
Mauritian /ale/ ‘to go’ /ena/ ‘there’
Tayo /ako/ ‘again’ /ale/ ‘to go’
Sri Lankan /ra/ ‘miss’ /æ:tik/ ‘tuberculosis’
Kristang /eli/ ‘he, she, it’
Zamboangueño /amo/ ‘boss’ /otro/ ‘other’
Ermitaño /ele/ no gloss given /ohos/ ‘eyes’
Kituba /awa/ ‘here’ /i.nsi/ ‘land’
Sango /ape/ no gloss given
Nubi /akulu/ ‘to eat’ /ila/ ‘except’
Baba Malay /anak/ ‘baby’ /ula/ ‘snake’

Table 2. Onsetless syllables in Creoles

The data in Table 2 show that syllables consisting only of a nucleus are allowed in all
Creoles. In terms of the CV-phonology model, this immediately excludes Creole
languages from Type I and Type III because these types presume obligatory onsets for all
syllables. In terms of Blevins’ framework, the obligatory onset parameter is set to ‘no’ in
all Creole languages. Furthermore, there appears to be a fairly strong edge effect, that is,
onsetless syllables seem to be permitted only word-initially, for the most part. I have
come across data and reports of vowel hiatus in several Creoles, however. It is attested in
a few Creole languages in the sample, as in Baba Malay /a.os/ ‘thirsty’, Berbice /bu.in/
‘hide’, Sango /to.a/ (no gloss given), St. Lucian /ãvi.e/ ‘curious’ and Zamboangueño
/a.ora/ ‘now’. Unfortunately, the currently available data sources preclude a more detailed
investigation of the occurrence of vowel hiatus across Creole languages.
All Creole languages have CV syllables, that is, open syllables with a single onset
consonant before the vocalic nucleus. This result is not surprising given that CV syllables
are found in any natural language. Examples may be gleaned from the appendix and from
Table 2, where most word-initial V-syllables are followed by a CV syllable.
It has been claimed in some works that CV syllables are overall most frequent in
Creole languages. Few researchers have presented any quantitative analysis of Creole
syllable types, however. CV syllables are the most frequent type judging from Stolz’s
(1986) numbers. In Carrington’s 1984 count of St. Lucian French Creole, CV syllables

8
occur in 61.33% of the total corpus analyzed. Whereas these results are suggestive, there
has been no systematic investigation of syllable type frequencies across Creoles. The
present investigation abstracts away from the question of syllable frequency. Instead, it
focuses on determining which syllable types and constituents are licensed to occur in the
core vocabulary of a given Creole. The goal is to uncover the possible, not the most
frequent, syllable types of Creole languages and to make typological generalizations
framed in the phonological models selected. Thus, it is tangential to the present concerns
if CV syllables are the most frequently occurring type in Creole languages, even though
this question is of interest to Creole studies and linguistics in general, of course.
Syllables with complex onsets, that is, at least two non-vocalic segments before
the vocalic nucleus, are found in nearly all Creole languages. It seems necessary to
recognize two classes, however. A few Creoles allow only glides (G) to the immediate
left of the nucleus, giving CGV structures, whereas a larger second class allows a fuller
set of consonants in this position, in particular sonorants and glides. Saramaccan, Baba
Malay and, with very few exceptions of Cw clusters, Nubi are the only languages in the
sample allowing exclusively single onsets in citation forms. However, Pakir (1986)
reports on a fast-speech rule of schwa-deletion in Baba Malay which creates word-initial
CC clusters, e.g. /skali/  [skali], /prut/  [prot] (with vowel-lowering) (no glosses
given). Thus, it appears that CC onsets may occur post-lexically in Baba Malay. Table 3
lays out Creole complex onsets in citation forms with examples for all languages in the
sample. Additional initial cluster data may be found in the appendix.

CG Ndyuka /dyendee/ ‘splendid’ /kwaka/‘cassava granules’

Kituba /kudya/ ‘to eat’ /kwenda/‘to go’
CC Negerhollands /bwa/ ‘preserve’ /groma/ ‘greedy’
Berbice /plk/ ‘place’ /speki/ ‘pork’
Haitian /klu/ ‘nail’ /bra/ ‘arm’
St. Lucian /plãte/ ‘to plant’ /bizwe/ ‘to need’
Angolar /bwaru/ ‘good’ /staka/ ‘picket’
São Tomense /tlisa/ ‘jaundice’ /kwelo/ ‘rabbit’
Papiamentu /skapa/ ‘escape’ /subla/ ‘blow’
Palenquero /drumi/ ‘to sleep’ /kumbla/ ‘to buy’
Unserdeutsch /fry/ ‘early’ /kwel/ ‘source’
Bislama /slo/ ‘slow’ /smol/ ‘small’
Tok Pisin /tri/ ‘tree, three’ /klos/ ‘clothes’
Mauritian /prekot/ ‘near’ /lapli/ ‘rain’
Tayo /pli/ ‘plus’ /pukwa/ ‘why’
Sri Lankan /dre:tu/ ‘correct’ /kwæ:ntru/ ‘coriander’
Kristang /greza/ ‘church’ /stiru/ ‘style’
Zamboangueño /klase/ ‘class’ /alegre/ ‘happy’
Ermitaño /klaa/ ‘club’ /entro/ ‘inside’
Sango /srango/ ‘doing’ /skula/ ‘to wash’

Table 3. Complex onsets in Creoles

9
20 out of 23 Creole (= 87%) in the sample routinely have complex onsets of some kind in
citation forms. 2 of these 20 Creoles allow only glides as C2 in C1C2V complex onset
structures. All other Creoles (18 of 23 = 78%) allow sonorant consonants as C2. These
results are the empirical backdrop for the generalization in (7).

(7) The great majority of Creole languages allows complex syllable onsets.

Recall that the CV-phonology typology does not distinguish between single and complex
onsets. Thus, it cannot express the distinction between Creoles with only single onsets
and those with complex onsets. As far as the parameter-based model is concerned, the
complex onset parameter is set to ‘yes’ in the vast majority of Creoles, allowing complex
onsets. A minority of Creole languages has this parameter set to ‘no’, allowing only
single onsets.
The data in (8) provide evidence concerning the question if there is an edge effect
across Creoles with respect to complex onsets. A percentage of these examples is familiar
from Tables 2 and 3.

(8) Word-internal complex onsets

Negerhollands /forfluk/ ‘sly’

Berbice /atriti/ ‘reverse’
Ndyuka /agwado/ ‘stringed instrument’
Haitian /ijen/ ‘hygiene’
St. Lucian /bizwe/ ‘to need’
Angolar /uvwa/ ‘nine’
São Tomense /kopla/ ‘to buy’
Papiamentu /iglesia/ ‘church’
Palenquero /abla/ ‘speak’
Unserdeutsch /gmyk/ ‘decorated’
Bislama /katres/ ‘cartridge’
Tok Pisin /abris/ ‘go past’
Mauritian /lapli/ ‘rain’
Tayo /pukwa/ ‘why’
Sri Lankan /kwæ:ntru/ ‘coriander’
Kristang /ombru/ ‘shoulder’
Zamboangueño /otro/ ‘other’
Ermitaño /entro/ ‘inside’
Kituba /uvwa/ ‘nine’
Sango /ndapre/ no gloss given

The data in (8) reveal that all Creoles that allow complex onsets permit them word-
internally. Recall that Saramaccan, Nubi and Baba Malay do not tolerate complex onsets
and, hence, do not appear in (8). Thus, there is no edge effect with regard to complex
onsets found in any of the Creoles.

10
 Codas

The claim that CV syllables are dominant in Creole languages entails that the great
majority of Creoles should allow only open syllables. This section presents results of the
current investigation concerning codas in Creoles. Glides and nasals in potential coda
position have been excluded from the count when these elements are the only ones found
in coda position. Single codas of glides and nasals are often considered not to be ‘real’
codas, in part because of the vocoid properties of glides and the frequently observed
alternations of oral vowels plus nasal codas with nasal vowels. Thus, only the occurrence
of non-nasal sonorants or obstruents in the right periphery of the syllable establishes the
presence of the coda constituent for the present survey.
A handful of Creole languages do not allow codas by the measure used in this
survey. They are Saramaccan, Ndyuka, Angolar, Kituba and Sango. This result is perhaps
not surprising. Saramaccan, Ndyuka and Angolar are considered to be among the most
radical and conservative Creoles in the world, whereas Kituba and Sango are lexified by
Bantu languages, which generally do not allow closed syllables. The remainder of the
Creole languages in the sample allows codas consisting of single consonants. An edge
effect may be observed as well. Dots have been given in Table 4 to mark syllable
boundaries that may not be immediately obvious from the outline of syllabification
principles given earlier.

No edge effect Word-final Word-medial

Negerhollands /gobed/ ‘prayer’ /forfluk/ ‘sly’
Berbice /glof/ ‘believe’ /fur.stan/ ‘understand’
Haitian /sik/ ‘sugar’ /es.plãdid/ ‘splendid’
St. Lucian /dokte/ ‘physician’ /uval/ ‘horse’
Papiamentu /berdat/ ‘truth’ /falsu/ ‘mean’
Unserdeutsch /gros/ ‘large’ /vl.h/ ‘which’
Bislama /swit/ ‘sweet’ /has.ban/ ‘husband’
Tok Pisin /fis/ ‘fish’ /alta/ ‘altar’
Mauritian /latab/ ‘table’ /palto/ ‘jacket’
Tayo /kat/ ‘four’ /solda/ ‘soldier’
Sri Lankan /dews/ ‘god’ /korpu/ ‘body’
Kristang /fasel/ ‘easy’ /uz.du/ ‘cuckold’
Zamboangueño /abril/ ‘April’ /kombersa/ ‘speak’
Ermitaño /bos/ ‘voice’ /pwelte/ no gloss given
Nubi /marid/ ‘fever’ /wakti/ ‘time’
Baba Malay /anak/ ‘baby’ /basat/ ‘bed-bug’

Edge effect
São Tomense /palma/ ‘palm tree’ /farkon/ ‘falcon’
Palenquero /ah.ma/ no gloss given /olbia/ no gloss given

Table 4. Single codas in Creoles

11
All of the Creoles in Table 4 show non-nasal sonorants or obstruents in coda position.
This does not preclude nasals or glides from occurring in this position, of course. For
example, the Bislama word /swit/ ‘sweet’ clearly establishes the coda by allowing the
plosive /t/ at the end of the word. In the word /has.ban/ ‘husband’, the fricative /s/ is also
a coda because it cannot form a complex onset with the following consonant /b/.
Naturally, nasals as in the syllable /ban/ are found in coda position as well.
A closer look at the data in Table 4 reveals the edge effect in the availability of
codas. In São Tomense and Palenquero, codas are permitted in word-medial position, but
no codas other than nasal consonants appear word-finally. In Palenquero, however,
obstruent codas occur as the result of a post-lexical rule through elision of word-final
unaccented vowels following consonants (e.g. [kus] - /kusa/ ‘thing’, [entons] - /entonse/
‘then’ and [tampok] - /tampoko/ ‘either’ in Bickerton & Escalante 1970: 257). All other
Creoles in Table 4 allow codas word-finally and word-medially in citation forms.
18 out of 23 Creole languages (= 78%) allow single non-nasal codas. This is an
important result for the understanding of Creole languages because it is completely
unexpected under the dominant CV idea. If open syllables were pervasive in the structure
of Creole languages, we would expect most Creoles not to allow closed syllables.
However, quite the opposite is the case, as expressed in the generalization in (9).

(9) The great majority of Creole languages allows closed syllables.

Given this generalization and the one in (6) above, only a minority of Creole languages in
the CV-phonology typology model is of Type II, that is, allowing onsetless syllables, but
no closed ones. Type IV must serve the majority of Creoles because it features onsetless
and closed syllables. As far as the parameter-based model is concerned, the coda
parameter is set to ‘yes’, therefore allowing closed syllables, in the great majority of
Creole languages. A minority of Creoles has it set to ‘no’, therefore allowing only open
syllables.
In the present sample, complex codas are robustly attested in a few Creole
languages: Haitian, Mauritian, Negerhollands and Unserdeutsch. Consider the data in
(10).

(10) Complex codas

(a) Haitian (Valdman1981)

/kilt/ ‘cult’ /fiks/ ‘set, firm’
/filt/ ‘filter’ /taks/ ‘tax’
(b) Mauritian (Baker & Hookoomsing 1987)
/rekolt/ ‘harvest’ /fiks/ ‘firm, stuck’
/filt/ ‘filter’ /taks/ ‘tax’
(c) Negerhollands
/tomp/ ‘stomp’ (Sabino 1993)
/kerk/ ‘church’ (Stolz 1986)
(d) Unserdeutsch (Volker 1982)
/finf/ ‘five’ /as/ ‘afraid’

12
Valdman (1978) has stated that only the final consonant clusters /lt/ and /ks/ are found in
French-lexified Creole languages. This is confirmed for Haitian and Mauritian, as seen in
(10) (a) and (10) (b), respectively. The sources on St. Lucian and Tayo, however, do not
provide enough information to investigate consonant clusters fully. We find /taks/ ‘tax’ in
Mondesir (1992), but other candidate entries for the clusters are missing in this dictionary
of St. Lucian. One instance of a complex coda in Tayo can also be found in Ehrhart
(1993), namely, /lareserv/ ‘reserve’, but the glossary is too short to test the other
candidates for complex codas.
Negerhollands and Unserdeutsch are among the most complex Creoles known in
terms of syllable structure. In addition to complex codas as shown in (10) (c) and (10)
(d), respectively, Negerhollands allows clusters of three consonants in word-initial onset
position (e.g. skrau ‘scratch’, Sabino 1993) and, according to Stolz (1986), in word-final
codas, although he provides no example for this structure. Volker (1982) reports that in
Unserdeutsch /s/ is added before // in clusters with /r/ and in word-final position, e.g.
/spra/ ‘language’ and /mns/ ‘person’. The resulting clusters are unusually complex
by any measure.
Membership in the group of Creole languages lexified by Germanic languages
other than English., however, does not predict the presence of complex codas, as the case
of Berbice Dutch Creole shows. Berbice allows single codas, but complex codas are
found only in loans from Guyanese Creole English (see the vocabulary presented in
Kouwenberg 1994). The relative scarcity of complex codas in Creole languages is
captured through the generalization in (11).

(11) Complex codas are uncommon in Creole languages.

The generalization in (11) holds over the core vocabulary of basilectal or mesolectal
Creole varieties. Acrolectal lexicons, recent loans etc., in particular in Germanic-lexified
Creoles, are well-known to show instances of complex codas with some frequency.
The syllable typology in the CV-phonology model does not capture the distinction
between Negerhollands, Haitian and Unserdeutsch on the one hand and the Creoles
allowing only single consonant codas on the other. Both groups of Creoles fall into Type
IV given that codas are allowed. The parameter-based model, however, readily
distinguishes between the two groups. For Negerhollands, Haitian and Unserdeutsch, the
complex coda parameter is set to ‘yes’, whereas it is set to ‘no’ for all other Creoles in the
sample. There appears to be an edge effect, given that no complex codas could be found
in word-medial position.
In sum, this section has shown that single consonant codas are permitted in all but
the most radical Creoles and the Bantu-lexified Creole languages. Complex codas, on the
other hand, are scarce in basilectal and mesolectal varieties. The next section presents the
results of the investigation of Creole syllable types.

Syllable types

Much of current thinking in linguistics would surmise that an extremely limited range of
syllable types is observed across Creole languages. In particular, the idea of CV-

13
dominance would predict that there are no or very few syllable types other than CV in
Creoles, notwithstanding the widely acknowledged occurrence of single codas in Atlantic
French-lexified Creoles. The extent of the discussion of syllable types varies considerably
in descriptions of Creole languages. Some works offer excellent and wide-ranging
information on syllable structure (e.g. Carrington 1984, Smith 1977, Stolz 1986), whereas
it is treated scantily or not at all in many other works. In the present article, I aim to
tabulate the syllable types in Creole languages that can be extracted from the available
sources and present this information so that meaningful comparisons across Creoles and
with non-Creole languages are possible. Consider Table 5 in this context.

V CV CVC VC CCV CCVC CVCC VCC CCVCC

yes yes Saramaccan
yes yes yes Angolar, Kituba,
Ndyuka, Sango
yes yes yes yes Baba Malay, Nubi
yes yes yes yes yes São Tomense
yes yes yes yes yes yes Berbice, Bislama,
Ermitaño, Kristang,
Palenquero,
Papiamentu, Sri
Lankan, St. Lucian,
Tayo, Tok Pisin,
Zamboangueño
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Haitian, Mauritian
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Negerhollands,
Unserdeutsch

Table 5. Attested syllable types across Creoles

Table 5 shows that the Creole languages of the world exhibit a wide range of syllable
types. The appendix presents structured data illustrating each syllable type. The data
show that all nine syllable types under investigation are attested, albeit not in all Creoles.
Creole languages exhibit a cline as far as the inventory of syllable types is concerned,
licensing anywhere from two to nine syllable types.
Despite the variation exhibited in Table 5, several generalizations are apparent.
All Creoles have CV syllables, just like any other natural language. However, no Creole
language is limited to CV syllables. All Creoles have at least one additional type, namely
syllables consisting of just a vocalic nucleus. Furthermore, all Creoles, just like all other
natural languages, exhibit the following property: if clusters of n Cs are possible syllable-
initially, then clusters of n–1 Cs are also possible syllable-initially, and if clusters of n Cs
are possible syllable-finally, then clusters of n–1 Cs are also possible syllable-finally (cf.
Blevins 1995). Given Table 5, this means that the presence of clusters in onsets or codas
entails the presence of single consonants in these positions, but not vice versa. For
instance, a language like Baba Malay has single onsets and codas, but no complex ones.
On the other hand, São Tomense has complex and single onsets.

14
 Most of the inventories in Table 5 cannot be distinguished under the CV-
phonology typology. According to this model, Saramaccan, Angolar, Kituba, Ndyuka and
Sango would all be Type II because they allow only open syllables, whereas all other
Creoles would be Type IV, allowing codas. A more fine-grained model is needed to
understand the variety of syllable types attested in Creole languages. The parameter-
based model is better suited to account for the Creole syllable type inventories, but also
cannot capture all of them. The first inventory allows V and CV syllables; it is easily
accounted for in the parameter-based model.

(12) Inventory: V, CV (Saramaccan)

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
no no no no

The syllable type inventory in (12) is the least marked that is possible in the parameter-
based model, according to Blevins (1995). Given ‘no’ as the unmarked parameter setting
and ‘yes’ as the marked one, the least marked inventory results when all parameters are
set to ‘no’. This is interesting from the point of view of Creole linguistics given that is
has been argued numerous times that Creoles grammars are in some significant sense
unmarked or, conversely, lack marked patterns or inventories. By this token, we would
expect a significant number of Creole languages with the parameter profile in (12) and
the resulting syllable type inventory of V and CV. However, this is not the case by a wide
margin. Most Creoles allow codas and complex onsets, showing that Creole syllable
inventories are rarely entirely unmarked. Instead, the vast majority of Creole syllable
inventories contains syllable types of at least some degree of markedness.
Inventories allowing only open syllables, but also complex onsets are easily
accounted for in the parameter-based model. Consider the parameter settings in (13).

(13) Inventory: V, CV, CCV (Angolar, Kituba, Ndyuka, Sango)

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
no yes no no

The parameter settings in (13) allow for CCV syllables because the complex onset
parameter is set to ‘yes’. The next profile restricts codas and onsets to single units.

(14) Inventory: V, CV, CVC, VC (Baba Malay, Nubi)

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
no no yes no

The parameter settings for this inventory seem straightforward: the complex onset
parameter and the complex coda parameter are both set to ‘no’.

15
 The profile in (15) accounts for most Creole languages.

(15) Inventory: V, CV, CVC, VC, CCV, CCVC

(Berbice, Bislama, Ermitaño, Kristang, Palenquero, Papiamentu, Sri Lankan, St.
Lucian, Tayo, Tok Pisin, Zamboangueño)

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
no yes yes no

The settings in (15) are clearly marked, given that two parameters are set to ‘yes’,
including the complex onset parameter. The robust occurrence of this profile is
unexpected under the traditional understanding of the syllable structure of Creole
languages. However, Creole languages across the spectrum of European lexifier
languages allow single codas and complex onsets resulting in six different syllable types.
The most complex inventory is also straightforwardly accounted for in the
parameter-based model.

(16) Inventory: V, CV, CVC, VC, CCV, CCVC, CVCC, VCC, CCVCC
(Negerhollands, Unserdeutsch)

Oblig. Complex Coda Complex

Onset Onset Coda
no yes yes yes

This is the richest inventory in the sample, allowing nine syllable types. Complex codas
are found together with all possibilities for the onset position. All parameters except the
obligatory onset parameter are set to ‘yes’ to accomplish this.
The parameter-based syllable typology model has been able to account for most
of the Creole syllable type inventories straightforwardly. However, three inventories
cannot be captured by this model. The ‘yes’ setting of the coda parameter and the
complex onset parameter would have to be chosen to arrive at V, CV, CVC, VC, CCV in
São Tomense. However, this predicts CCVC syllables as well, but there is no evidence
for them in this language. Furthermore, the complex onset parameter and the complex
coda parameter have to be switched on to generate CCV, CCVC and CVCC syllables in
Mauritian and Haitian. However, these settings also incorrectly predict robust VCC and
CCVCC syllables in these languages. In short, the problem with the parameter-based
model is that the occurrence of complex onsets and codas in certain syllable types should
license them across the board, whereas this is not observed in several languages. Given
this shortcoming, future research needs to develop a theoretical model that can account
for all attested syllable inventory types in the Creole languages of the world. It is beyond
the scope of this paper to address this issue.

16
 Diversity and complexity in Creole syllable structure

The key concept in previous thinking about Creole syllable structure has been uniformity.
It has been held that Creole languages do not allow many syllable types beyond CV, if
any. Few Creole languages such as Atlantic French-lexified Creoles and Negerhollands
have been recognized to license syllable codas routinely. These languages have been
treated as special cases, however, rather than the norm. The present survey has produced
quite the opposite result. The Creole languages of the world show considerable diversity
in terms of their syllable structure, particularly as far as the inventories of syllable types
are concerned. Only one parameter was found to be set uniformly: All Creole languages
allow onsetless syllables. Naturally, Creole languages display universals of syllable
structure that are found to be true in all natural languages: All Creole syllables must have
a nucleus, all Creoles have CV syllables, and complex onsets and codas presuppose
simpler ones. This should not deter from the fact that Creole syllables vary along several
dimensions including edge effect, whether or not codas are allowed and whether or not
complex onsets or complex codas are permitted.
The wide range of syllable types employed in Creole languages may be illustrated
through the list of syllable templates in (17). Syllable templates are understood in the
present context as a descriptive short-hand device encoding the full set of syllable types
in a given language. For example, the syllable template (C) (C) V (C) encapsulates the
types V, CV, CVC, VC, CCV and CCVC.

(17) Syllable templates in Creoles

(a) (C) V: Saramaccan

(b) (C) (C) V: Angolar, Kituba, Ndyuka, Sango
(c) (C) V (C): Baba Malay, Nubi
(d) (C) (C) V (C): Berbice, Bislama, Ermitaño, Kristang, Palenquero,
Papiamentu, Sri Lankan, St. Lucian, Tayo, Tok
Pisin, Zamboangueño
(e) (C) (C) V (C) (C): Negerhollands, Unserdeutsch

The syllable template notation enables a compact picture of the diversity of Creole
syllable types. However, it is not able to capture all occurring Creole inventories
correctly in this way. Complex onsets and single codas occur in São Tomense, but using
the template (C) (C) V (C) would incorrectly imply that CCVC syllables occur in this
language. Analogously, Mauritian and Haitian have complex onsets and complex codas,
but the template (C) (C) V (C) (C) would incorrectly imply that VCC or CCVCC
syllables are attested in these languages. The case for diversity, however, is not affected
by this issue. Sizable syllable type inventories are found across lexifier languages. Codas
and complex onsets may be found in Creoles lexified by any of the European languages,
as the lists in (17) (d) and (17) (e) show.
Recall that recent work by McWhorter (2001) has expounded the idea that Creole
languages are in some significant sense typologically simple. The Creole simplicity
hypothesis is that Creole languages are consistently simpler in structure than non-Creole
languages and that Creole grammars are the world’s simplest grammars overall. The

17
preceding discussion has made clear that Creole languages occupy a wide range of
syllable types similar to non-Creole languages. About the only inventory that was not
found for Creole languages is an exclusive CV language such as Hua (see Blevins 1995).
Given the results of the present study, we may test the simplicity hypothesis
Creole-internally. If it is the case that Creoles are simple overall, then Creole grammars
should cluster significantly around simple structures. In other words, there should not be
sizeable groups of Creole languages attesting to structures of any notable degree of
complexity. Most linguists would agree to consider (C) V, (C) (C) V and (C) V (C)
syllable templates to be quite simple. In such languages, only open syllables are allowed
or no clusters are permitted. Under this measure, Saramaccan, Angolar, Kituba, Ndyuka,
Sango, Baba Malay and Nubi would be considered to have simple inventories of no more
than four syllable types among the Creole languages in the present sample. Note,
however, that these Creoles are a minority (7/23 = 30%). On the other hand, inventories
allowing the full or nearly the full set of complex onsets and codas may be considered
complex. Haitian, Mauritian, Negerhollands and Unserdeutsch fall into this category
because they allow complex codas in addition to complex onsets, even though only
Negerhollands and Unserdeutsch display the full set. This group is a small minority (4/23
= 17%). A middle group of languages allows complex onsets or complex codas, but not
both. This comprises a slight majority of Creole languages, ranging from São Tomense to
Zamboangueño in Table 5 (12/23 = 52%). I conclude that Creole syllable structure is not
particularly simple, not is it highly complex in the majority of cases. Instead, it displays
what may be called medium complexity, with the majority of Creole languages showing
five, six or seven syllable types.
It is unexpected the Creole simplicity hypothesis that the great majority of Creoles
languages shows syllable type inventories of medium or higher complexity (5 to 9
syllable types) (16/23 = 70%). This outcome is not a great surprise, however, in light of
recent detailed investigations into the syllabic and segmental structure of Creole
languages. Plag & Schramm (forthcoming) have concluded that syllables in early
Suriname and Caribbean Creoles are of medium complexity, allowing codas or complex
onsets. Furthermore, Klein (forthcoming) has found that segmental inventories of Creole
languages occupy the medium range identified for non-Creole languages in Maddieson’s
(1984) typological study. Thus, the evidence from Creole languages converges on the
idea that their phonologies exhibit a typical or medium degree of complexity.
In terms of the parameter-based model, it is surprising to the Creole simplicity
hypothesis that unmarked parameter settings are attested in only a minority of Creole
languages. We may consider those parameter settings as unmarked in which no more than
one parameter is set to ‘yes’. These Creoles show no more than four syllable types. If
Creole languages in general tended towards unmarked, simple syllable inventories in
their synchronic phonology, one would expect a majority of unmarked parameter
settings.
Given the diversity and complexity found in Creole syllables, it seems that
syllable typology is not a defining linguistic characteristic of Creole languages. We may
test this idea by investigating the syllable structure of Creole languages that have been
argued to be prototypical and identifiable as a typological class: Ndyuka, Tok Pisin,
Saramaccan, Haitian, St. Lucian, Mauritian, Fa d’Ambu, and Negerhollands (McWhorter
1998). All of these are in the present sample, with the exception of Fa d’Ambu. Judging

18
from Post (1995), however, the syllable structure of Fa d’Ambu is similar, if not identical
to its neighboring relative Angolar. Thus, in the present context, Angolar takes the place
of Fa d’Ambu in exploring if there is a correlate in the distribution of syllable types to
arguably prototypical Creoles.

(18) Syllable type inventories in prototypical Creoles

V, CV V, CV, V, CV, CVC, V, CV, CVC, V, CV, CVC, VC,

CCV VC, CCV, VC, CCV, CCV, CCVC, CVCC,
CCVC CCVC, CVCC VCC, CCVCC
Saramaccan Angolar, Tok Pisin, Haitian, Negerhollands
Ndyuka St. Lucian Mauritian

The display in (18) shows that the languages of the Creole prototype do not correspond to
a uniform syllable structure. Instead, we find five inventories with considerable diversity
of syllable types across these languages. Furthermore, only two of the five inventories
may be considered simple. Whereas Saramaccan, Angolar and Ndyuka have only open
syllables, the other languages have closed syllables with single or complex codas. Thus, it
appears that there is no correlation between potentially prototypical Creole languages and
uniformity or simplicity of syllable structure.

Conclusion

The results of the present investigation make necessary a fundamental rethinking of the
syllable structure of Creole languages. Far from being uniform, Creole languages exhibit
anywhere from two to nine syllable types in their inventories. Strong evidence has been
mounted against the idea that Creole languages are limited to CV syllables in any
significant sense. No Creole language is limited to CV syllables, whereas all Creoles
have them as part of their inventory, just like any other natural language. There is a fair
range of syllable types, with the most frequent template being close to or more complex
than (C) (C) V (C). The simplest template is (C) V; the most complex template is (C) (C)
V (C) (C). Given that acrolectal varieties and recent loans have been excluded from
consideration in this investigation as much as possible, it seems clear that the more
complex inventories are not due to decreolization. Instead, it appears that the phonology
of the core vocabulary of basilectal and mesolectal Creole varieties encompasses a good
degree of diversity and complexity in terms of syllable structure. However, decreolization
and post-creole loans may result in even more complex syllable types if the language
exerting the contact influence has them. The extensive literature on variable word-final
consonant cluster simplification in English-lexified Creoles provides evidence for this
because it shows that word-final complex codas are attested, at least in a sizeable
minority of cases. Thus, the syllable structure of certain Creole languages is probably
more complex than laid out in this investigation when acrolectal varieties and recent
loans are considered, in particular where Germanic lexifier languages are involved.
The two models of syllable typology employed in this investigation have been
able to provide important guideposts for the analysis. However, it has become apparent

19
that the structure of Creole syllables provides challenges to both of them. The CV-
phonology model is not fine-grained enough to distinguish between the diverse Creole
syllable inventories, in part because it relies on the presence versus absence of obligatory
onsets as a defining characteristic. The present analysis has shown that this parameter is
vacuous for Creole languages, given that none of them requires onsets. The parameter-
based model has done a good job in accounting for most of the Creole syllable
inventories, but does not capture all of them. The issue for future research is to devise a
model where parameter settings need not necessarily apply across the board.
The results of the present investigation provide strong evidence against the Creole
simplicity hypothesis. The syllable types attested in Creoles may be classed as simple in
only a minority of Creole languages. A distinct majority of Creoles, however, displays
syllable structure of medium or higher complexity. This result corroborates recent
evidence from other phonological investigations strongly supporting the hypothesis that
the phonology of Creole languages is of medium or typical complexity.
Given the present analysis, a number of tasks for future research have become
apparent. The cause of the phonological restructuring of superstrate words needs to be
revisited, now that it seems clear that CV syllables are significantly less dominant within
Creole languages than previously thought. Furthermore, a theoretical explanation for the
considerable diversity and complexity of syllable structure in the Creole languages of the
world needs to be found and a viable model accounting for all Creole syllable inventories
needs to be developed. In addition, the phonotactics of Creole languages, that is, the
constraints on permissible sequences of sounds in Creole words and syllables need to be
investigated in more detail. Furthermore, the hypothesis that Creole phonologies exhibit
medium or typical complexity needs to be examined further, particularly in comparison
to its competitor, the Creole simplicity hypothesis. Finally, it is hoped that this paper has
contributed to showing that the phonology of Creole languages in general is an exciting
and rewarding area of linguistic research.

20
 Appendix

The purpose of the appendix is to identify the sources used and to provide structured data
exemplifying each of the syllable types that are attested in a given Creole language in the
sample. More data are given in total than would have been possible in the main text. The
Creole languages are presented in the order in which they appear in Table1. Glosses from
sources written in languages other than English have been translated wherever possible.
Where no glosses were given in the source, an effort has been made to retrieve the
meanings of the items in question. This is not always been successful as indicated by the
annotation ‘no gloss given’. Periods are provided to indicate syllable boundaries only
where this is not immediately obvious.

Negerhollands

Sources: Sabino (1990, 1993) (Sa 90, 93), Stolz 1986

All data are from Stolz (1986), unless indicated otherwise.

V
/izu/ ‘iron’ /ale:/ ‘alone’

CV
/fekete/ ‘fight’ /bini/ ‘inside’

CVC
/pik/ ‘pluck’ /gobed/ ‘prayer’

VC
/ef/ ‘if’ /alma/ ‘all’

CCV
/bwa/ ‘preserve’ (Sa 93) /groma/ ‘greedy’

CCVC
/glof/ ‘believe’ (Sa90, 93) /forfluk/ ‘sly’
/frag/ ‘ask’ (Sa 90)

CVCC
/tomp/ ‘stomp’ (Sa 93) /kerk/ ‘church’
/mant/ ‘month’ (Sa 90) /wort/ ‘word’ (Sa 90)

VCC
/aks/ ‘axe’ (Sa 90) /akt/ ‘eight’ (Sa 90)

CCVCC
/an.stons/ ‘instantly’ (Sa 90) /skerp/ ‘sharpen’ (Sa 90)

21
 Berbice

Source: Kouwenberg (1994)

V
/atriti/ ‘reverse’ /oboko/ ‘hen’
CV
/toko/ ‘child’ /pili/ ‘arrow’

CVC
/purkaru/ ‘to fight’ /talma/ ‘serve out’
/timbabos/ ‘type of worksong’

VC
/bu.in/ ‘hide’ /ondro/ ‘under’

CCV
/speki/ ‘pork’ /waskolo/ ‘why’
/plk/ ‘place’

CCVC
/furstan/ ‘understand’ /krombu/ ‘bend’
/glof/ ‘believe’ /klup/ ‘hit’

Ndyuka

Source: Huttar & Huttar (1994)

V
/okoo/ ‘okra’ /uma/ ‘woman’

CV
/nosu/ ‘nose’ /sido/ ‘to sit’

CCV
/dyendee/ ‘splendid’ /alandya/ ‘type of citrus fruit’
/kwaka/ ‘cassava granules’ /agwado/ ‘stringed instrument’

Saramaccan

Sources: Aceto (1996) (A), Johnson (1974) (J), Rountree (1972) (R)

V
/oto/ ‘other’ (A) /ahalala/ ‘centipede’ (R)

22
 /eside/ ‘yesterday’ (J)

CV
/si.nki.ni/ ‘skin’ (A) /gba.mba/ ‘meat’ (R)
/koti/ ‘cut’ (R)

Haitian

Sources: Cadely (2002) (C), Nikiema (2000) (N), Valdman (1978, 1981)
All data are from Valdman’s works, unless noted otherwise.

V
/emab/ ‘amiable’ /ijen/ ‘hygiene’

CV
/tete/ ‘bosom’ (C) /pare/ ‘prepare’

CVC
/sik/ ‘sugar’ /ps/ ‘plaque’ (C)

VC
/aksidan/ ‘accident’ (N) /egzod/ ‘exodus’ (N)

CCV
/klu/ ‘nail’ /bra/ ‘arm’
/megri/ ‘to become thin’ (N)

CCVC
/pwop/ ‘clean’ /klas/ ‘class’ (N)

/CVCC/
/kilt/ ‘cult’ /fiks/ ‘set, firm’
/filt/ ‘filter’ /taks/ ‘tax’

St. Lucian

Source: Carrington (1984)

V
/ofe/ ‘to offer’ /epi/ ‘with, and’

CV
/batõ/ ‘stick’ /hote/ ‘height’

23
 CVC
/dokte/ ‘physician’ /uval/ ‘horse’

VC
/i/ ‘offspring; child’ /ãvi.e/ ‘curious’

CCV
/plãte/ ‘to plant’ /bizwe/ ‘to need’
/ublie/ ‘to oblige’

CCVC
/blag/ ‘joke’ /vwel/ ‘sail’

Angolar

Sources: Lorenzino 1998, Maurer 1995

All data are from Maurer (1995).

V
/abi/ ‘April’ /ome/ ‘human’

CV
/biri/ ‘to open’ /kega/ ‘to carry’

CCV
/bwaru/ ‘good’ /fyoko/ ‘to hurry’
/uvwa/ ‘nine’ /vevya/ ‘to grow’

São Tomense

Sources: Lorenzino (1998) (L), Valkhoff (1966)

All data are from Valkhoff (1966), unless noted otherwise.

V
/ose/ ‘sky’ /ami/ ‘I’

CV
/galufu/ ‘fork’ /supeto/ ‘clever’

CVC
/palma/ ‘palm tree’ /farkon/ ‘falcon’ (L)
/di.glasa/ ‘misfortune’ (L)

24
 /VC/
/alvuli/ ‘tree’

CCV
/bligasõ/ ‘obligation’ /tlisa/ ‘jaundice’
/kwelo/ ‘rabbit’ /kopla/ ‘to buy’

Papiamentu

Main sources: Kouwenberg & Murray (1994; K & M), Munteanu (1996)
Auxiliary source: Maurer (1998)
Data are from Munteanu (1996) unless noted otherwise.

V
/iglesia/ ‘church’ /uzu/ no gloss given

CV
/suku/ ‘sugar’ (K&M) /zoya/ ‘swing’ (K&M)

CVC
/falsu/ ‘mean’ (K&M) /nos/ ‘our’
/harta/ ‘to glut’ /sigel/ ‘age’
/berdat/ ‘truth’

VC
/altar/ ‘altar’ /ermen/ no gloss given

CCV
/skapa/ ‘escape’ (K&M) /subla/ ‘blow’ (K&M)

CCVC
/tres/ ‘three’ /skirbi/ ‘to correspond’

Palenquero

Sources: Bickerton & Escalante (1970) (B&E), Lewis (1970)

All data are from Lewis (1970), unless noted otherwise.

V
/abla/ ‘speak’(B&E) /uto/ no gloss given

CV
/kusa/ ‘thing’ (B&E) /tampoko/ ‘either’ (B&E)

25
 CVC
/tumba/ no gloss given /lihto/ no gloss given
/tad.de/ no gloss given

VC
/entonse/ ‘then’ (B&E) /ahma/ no gloss given
/olbia/ no gloss given

CCV
/drumi/ ‘to sleep’ /negro/ ‘black’
/flako/ no gloss given /kumbla/ ‘to buy’

CCVC
/blanko/ no gloss given /pwehko/ no gloss given

Unserdeutsch

Source: Volker (1982)

V
/abn/ ‘evening’

CV
/ve/ ‘way’ /son/ ‘sun’
/dasu/ ‘to that’ /gsa/ ‘said’

CVC
/ber/ ‘mountain’ /bu/ ‘book’
/vlh/ ‘which’

VC
/is/ ‘ist’

CCV
/fry/ ‘early’ /kwel/ ‘source’

CCVC
/gmyk/ ‘decorated’ /gros/ ‘large’
/flansu/ ‘plantation’

CVCC
/finf/ ‘five’ /hols/ ‘wood’

26
 VCC
/as/ ‘afraid’ /unt/ ‘and’

CCVCC
/traxt/ ‘dress’ /sekraft/ ‘ability to see’

Bislama

Sources: Lynch (1975) (L), Tryon (1987), Meyerhoff (1993) (M)

All data are from Tryon (1987), unless noted otherwise

V
/akis/ ‘axe’ /eli/ ‘early’

CV
/holem/ ‘to hold’ /tede/ ‘today’

CVC
/bokis/ ‘box’ /sotfala/ ‘short’
/pipol/ ‘people’ /naf/ ‘enough’
/hasban/ ‘husband’

VC
/olketa/ ‘all’ (L) /is/ ‘east’
/emti/ ‘empty’

CCV
/kopra/ ‘copra’ /slo/ ‘slow’ (M)

CCVC
/swit/ ‘sweet’ /gris/ ‘fat’
/katres/ ‘cartridge’ /brok/ ‘broken (adj.)’ (M)
/smol/ ‘small’ (M)

Tok Pisin

Sources: Smith (2002), Verhaar (1995) (V)

All data are from Smith (2002), unless noted otherwise.

V
/abris/ ‘go past’ /epa/ ‘stingray’ (V)

27
 CV
/redi/ ‘ready’ /pikinini/ ‘child’

CVC
/fis/ ‘fish’ /abus/ ‘animal food’
/aninit/ ‘underneath’

VC
/ensin/ ‘engine’ /asde/ ‘yesterday’
/alta/ ‘altar’ (V)

CCV
/tri/ ‘tree, three’ /bekri/ ‘bakery’ (V)

CCVC
/fren/ ‘friend’ /klos/ ‘clothes’

Mauritian

Sources: Baker (1972), Baker & Hookoomsing (1987) (B&H)

All data are from Baker (1972), unless noted otherwise.

V
/ale/ ‘to go’ /ena/ ‘there’

CV
/vini/ ‘to come’ /fizi/ ‘rifle’

CVC
/palto/ ‘jacket’ /latab/ ‘table’

VC
/alzeb/ ‘algebra’ (B&H) /apsoli/ ‘absolut’ (B&H)

CCV
/prekot/ ‘near’ /lapli/ ‘rain’

CCVC
/deswit/ ‘immediately’ /blag/ ‘joke’ (B&H)
/pret/ ‘priest’ (B&H)

CVCC
/rekolt/ ‘harvest’ (B&H) /fiks/ ‘firm, stuck’ (B&H)
/filt/ ‘filter’ (B&H) /taks/ ‘tax’ (B&H)

28
 Tayo

Source: Ehrhart (1993)

V
/ale/ ‘to go’ /ako/ ‘again’

CV
/pu/ ‘for’ /tape/ ‘to beat’

CVC
/kat/ ‘four’ /solda/ ‘soldier’

VC
/er/ ‘hour’ /o:t/ ‘disgrace’

CCV
/pli/ ‘plus’ /pukwa/ ‘why’

CCVC
/pret/ ‘priest’ /labrus/ ‘brousaille’

Sri Lankan

Source: Smith (1977)

V
/ra/ ‘miss’ /æ:tik/ ‘tuberculosis’

CV
/læ:ñ/ ‘firewood’ /kupa/ ‘stare’

CVC
/korpu/ ‘body’ /dews/ ‘god’

VC
/is.kamu/ ‘fish scale’ /:n.d/ ‘wave’
/altu/ ‘tall, high’

CCV
/dre:tu/ ‘correct’ /obrigadu/ ‘thanks’

CCVC
/kwæ:n.tru/ ‘coriander’ /friz.mu/ ‘dear’

29
 Kristang

Sources: Baxter (1988), Thurgood & Thurgood (1996) (T&T)

All data are from Baxter (1988), unless noted otherwise.

V
/eli/ ‘he, she, it’ /ati/ ‘until’ (T&T)

CV
/kaza/ ‘house’ /dagu/ ‘jaw’

CVC
/forsa/ ‘strength’ /fasel/ ‘easy’
/mas/ ‘more’ /muler/ ‘wife’ (T&T)
/aros/ ‘rice’ (T&T)

VC
/ombru/ ‘shoulder’ /uzdu/ ‘cuckold’
/albi/ ‘tree’ (T&T)

CCV
/stiru/ ‘style’ /greza/ ‘church’
/otru/ ‘other’ (T&T) /alegri/ ‘happy’ (T&T)

CCVC
/drentu/ ‘inside’ /tres/ ‘three’ (T&T)
/tras/ ‘behind’ (T&T)

Zamboangueño

Sources: Forman (1972), Whinnom (1956) (W)

All data are from Forman (1972), unless noted otherwise

V
/amo/ ‘boss’ /otro/ ‘other’
/a.ora/ ‘now’ (W)

CV
/gana/ ‘win’ /barato/ ‘cheap’

CVC
/soltero/ ‘brother’ /kombersa/ ‘speak’

VC
/anda/ ‘go’ /algun/ ‘certain’

30
 CCV
/klase/ ‘class’ /alegre/ ‘happy’

CCVC
/abril/ ‘April’ /tyempo/ ‘time’

Ermitaño

Source: Whinnom (1956)

V
/ele/ no gloss given /ohos/ ‘eyes’

CV
/sumi/ no gloss given /boka/ ‘mouth’

CVC
/pulseras/ ‘bracelets’ /bos/ ‘voice’

VC
/el/ ‘the’ /urta/ no gloss given

CCV
/klaa/ ‘club’ /entro/ ‘inside’

CCVC
/pwelte/ no gloss given /etras/ ‘after’

Kituba

Sources: Fehderau (1962) (F), Mufwene (1997) (M), Swift & Zola (1963) (S&Z)

V
/i.nsi/ ‘country, land’ (S&Z) /awa/ ‘here’ (F)

CV
/munoko/ ‘mouth’ (M) /dikulu/ ‘leg, foot’ (M)

CGV
/ku-vwanda/ ‘to sit down’ (S&Z) /ku-dya/ ‘to eat’ (S&Z)
/uvwa/ ‘nine’ (F)

31
 Sango

Sources: Pasch (1997) (P), Walker & Samarin (1997)

All data are from Walker & Samarin (1997), unless noted otherwise

V
/ape/ no gloss given /to.a/ no gloss given

CV
/mere.nge/ ‘child’ /men/ ‘certain’
/sukula/ ‘to wash’ (P)

CCV
/nda.pre/ no gloss /srango/ ‘doing’

Nubi

Main sources: Heine (1982), Pasch & Thelwall (1987)

Auxiliary source: Owens 1997
All data are from Pasch & Thelwall (1987).

V
/akulu/ ‘to eat’ /abat/ ‘armpit’
/ila/ ‘except’

CV
/kidima/ ‘work’ /mutSele/ ‘rice’
/bara/ ‘outside’

CVC
/marid/ ‘fever’ /kuwes/ ‘good, nice’
/asab/ ‘vein, root’ /sas/ ‘frying pan’
/wakti/ ‘time’ /lib.ra/ ‘needle’

VC
/abdegi/ ‘butterfly’ /agder/ ‘to be able’
/alan/ ‘because’ /as.ma/ ‘name’
/ag.rab/ ‘scorpion’

Baba Malay

Sources: Lim (1981) (L), Pakir (1986) (P)

32
V
/ula/ ‘snake’ (L) /anak/ ‘baby’ (L)

CV
/budak/ ‘child’ (L) /tahu/ ‘to know’ (P)

CVC
/tingal/ ‘to stay’ (L) /nasi/ ‘rice’ (P)
/basat/ ‘bed-bug’ (P) /cakap/ no gloss given (L)

VC
/erti/ no gloss given (L) /a-pau/ no gloss given (L)
/a.os/ ‘thirsty’ (P)

33
 References

Aceto, M. (1996). Early Saramaccan syllable structure: An analysis of complex onsets

from Schumann’s 1778 manuscript. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 11
(1), 23-44.
Alleyne, M. (1980). Comparative Afro-American. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Baker, P. (1972). Kreol. A description of Mauritian Creole. London: Hurst.
Baker, P. & V. Hookoomsing (1987). Dictionary of Mauritian Creole. Morisyen –
English – Français. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Bartens, A. (1995): Die iberoromanisch-basierten Kreolsprachen. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter
Lang.
Baxter, A. (1988). A grammar of Kristang (Malacca Creole Portuguese). Pacific
Linguistics (B-95). Canberra: Australian National University.
Bickerton, D. & A. Escalante (1970). Palenquero: A Spanish-based Creole of Northern
Colombia. Lingua 24, 254-267.
Blevins, J. (1995): The syllable in phonological theory. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), The
handbook of phonological theory (pp. 206-244). Oxford: Blackwell.
Boretzky, N. (1983). Kreolsprachen, Substrate und Sprachwandel. Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz.
Cadely, J.-R. (2002). Le statut des voyelles nasales en Créole haïtien. Lingua 112, 435-
464.
Carrington, L. (1984). St. Lucian Creole. Hamburg: Buske.
Clements, G. N. (1990). The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In J.
Kingston & M. Beckman (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology I. Between the
grammar and physics of speech (pp. 283-333). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Clements, G. N. & S. J. Keyser (1983). CV phonology: A generative phonology of the
syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ehrhart, S. (1993). Le créole français de St-Louis (le tayo) en Nouvelle-Calédonie.
Hamburg: Buske.
Fehderau, H. (1962). Descriptive grammar of the Kituba language. A dialectal survey.
Léopoldville: American Mennonite Brethren Board of Missions.
Forman, M. (1972). Zamboangueño texts with grammatical analysis. A study of
Phillipine Creole Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.
Giegerich, H. (1992). English phonology. An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Heine, B. (1982). The Nubi language of Kibera – An Arabic Creole. Berlin: Reimer.
Holm, J. (2000). An introduction to pidgins and creoles. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Huttar, G. & M. Huttar (1994). Ndyuka. London: Routledge.
Johnson, M. (1974). Two morpheme structure rules in an English proto-creole. In D.
DeCamp & I. Hancock (Eds.), Pidgins and Creoles: Current trends and prospects
(pp. 118-129). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Kahn, D. (1976). Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. Unpublished
doctoral disstertaion, MIT. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Kaye, A. & M. Tosco (2001). Pidgin and Creole languages. München: Lincom Europa.

34
Kenstowicz, M. (1994). Phonology in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
Klein, T. B., forthcoming. Creole phonology typology and complexity: Evidence from
phoneme inventory size, vowel quality and stop consonants. In P. Bhatt & I. Plag
(Eds.), The structure of Creole words: Segmental, syllabic and morphological
aspects. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kouwenberg, S. (1994). A grammar of Berbice Dutch Creole. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Kouwenberg, S. & E. Murray (1994). Papiamentu. München: Lincom Europa.
Lewis, A. (1970). A descriptive analysis of the Palenquero dialect. Unpublished M.A.
dissertation. University of the West Indies, Mona.
Lim, S. (1981). Baba Malay: The language of the ‘straits-born’ Chinese. Unpublished
B.A. (Hons.) dissertation. Monash University.
Lorenzino, G. (1998). The Angolar Creole Portuguese of São Tomé: Its grammar and
sociolinguistic history. München: Lincom Europa.
Lynch, J. (1975). Bislama phonology and grammar: A review article. Kivung 8 (2), 186-
204.
Maddieson, I. (1984). Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maurer, P. (1995). L’angolar: Un créole afro-portugais parlé à São Tomé. Hamburg:
Buske.
Maurer, P. (1998). El papiamentu de Curazao. In M. Perl & A. Schwegler (Eds.),
América negra. Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades
hispanicas, portuguesas y criollas (pp. 139-218). Frankfurt a. M.: Vervuert.
McWhorter, J. (1998). Identifying the creole prototype: Vindicating a typological class.
Language 74 (4), 788-818.
McWhorter, J. (2000). The missing Spanish Creoles. Recovering the birth of plantation
contact languages. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McWhorter, J. (2001). The world's simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic
Typology 5, 125-166.
Meyerhoff, M. (2003). Reduplication in Bislama. An overview of phonological and
semantic factors. In S. Kouwenberg (Ed.), Twice as meaningful. Reduplication in
Pidgins, Creoles and other contact languages. (pp. 231-238). London:
Battlebridge.
Mondesir, J. (1992). Dictionary of St. Lucian Creole. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mufwene, S. (1997). Kitúba. In S. Thomason (Ed.), Contact languages. A wider
perspective (pp. 173-208). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mühlhäusler, P. (1997): Pidgin and Creole linguistics (2nd ed.). London: University of
Westminster Press.
Munteanu, D. (1996). El papiamento, lengua criolla hispánica. Madrid: Gredos.
Nikiema, E. (2000). Lexical and epenthetic initial vowels in Haitian Creole. Journal of
Pidgin and Creole Languages 15 (1), 171-177.
Owens, J. (1997). Arabic-based pidgins and creoles. In S. Thomason (Ed.), Contact
languages. A wider perspective (pp. 125-172). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Pakir, A. (1986). A linguistic investigation of Baba Malay. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation. University of Hawai’i.
Pasch, H. (1997). Sango. In S. Thomason (Ed.), Contact languages. A wider perspective
(pp. 209-270). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

35
Pasch, H. & R. Thelwall (1987). Losses and innovations in Nubi. In P. Maurer & T.
Stolz (Eds.), Varia creolica. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Parkvall, M. (2000). Out of Africa. African influences in Atlantic Creoles. London:
Battlebridge.
Plag, I. & M. Schramm, forthcoming. Early Creole syllable structure: A cross-linguistic
survey of the earliest attested varieties of Saramaccan, Sranan, St. Kitts and
Jamaican. In P. Bhatt & I. Plag (Eds.), The structure of Creole words: Segmental,
syllabic and morphological aspects. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Post, M. (1995). Fa d’Ambu. In J. Arends, P. Muysken & N. Smith (Eds.), Pidgins and
Creoles. An introduction (pp. 191-204). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Romaine, S. (1988). Pidgin and Creole languages. London: Longman.
Rountree, S. C. (1972). The phonological structure of stems in Saramaccan. In J. E.
Grimes (Ed.), Languages of the Guianas (pp. 22-27). Norman, Oklahoma:
Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Sabino, R. (1990). Towards a phonology of Negerhollands: An analysis of phonological
variation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Sabino, R. (1993). On onsets: Explaining Negerhollands initial clusters. In F. Byrne & J.
Holm (Eds.), Atlantic meets Pacific. A global view of pidginization and
creolization (pp. 37-44). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Sebba, M. (1997): Contact languages. Pidgins and Creoles. London: Macmillan.
Smith, G. (2002). Growing up with Tok Pisin. Contact, creolization and change in Papua
New Guinea’s national language. London: Battlebridge.
Smith, I. R. (1977). Sri Lanka Creole Portuguese phonology. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Cornell University.
Stolz, T. (1986). Gibt es das kreolische Sprachwandelmodell? Vergleichende Grammatik
des Negerholländischen. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.
Swift, L. B. & E. W. A. Zola (1963). Kituba basic course. Washington, D.C.: Foreign
Service Institute.
Thurgood, E., & G. Thurgood (1996). Aspect, tense, or Aktionsart? The particle ja in
Kristang (Malaacca Creole Portuguese). Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages
11(1), 45-70.
Tryon, D. (1987). Bislama. In introduction to the national language of Vanuatu. Pacific
Linguistics (D-72). Canberra: Australian National University.
Valdman, A. (1978). Le créole: structure, statut et origine. Paris: Klinksieck.
Valdman. A. (1981). Haitian Creole – English –French dictionary. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana University, Creole Institue.
Valkhoff, M. (1966). Studies in Portuguese and Creole. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand
University Press.
Verhaar, J. (1995): Toward a reference grammar of Tok Pisin: An experiment in corpus
linguistics. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Volker, C. (1982): An introduction to Rabaul Creole German (Unserdeutsch).
Unpublished M.A. dissertation. University of Queensland.
Walker, J. & W. Samarin (1997). Sango phonology. In A. Kaye (Ed.), Phonologies of
Asia and Africa (including the Caucasus) vol. 2 (pp. 861-880). Winona Lake,
Indiana: Eisenbrauns.

36
Whinnom, K. (1956). Spanish contact vernaculars in the Philippine islands. Hong Kong
University Press.

37