Two Indo-Portuguese Creoles in Contrast PDF

Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 17:2. 191-236 (2002).  John Benjamins B.V.
, Amsterdam
Not to be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher.
TWO INDO-PORTUGUESE CREOLES IN CONTRAST 1
J. Clancy Clements Andrew J. Koontz-Garboden

Indiana University Stanford University
This paper presents a comparative study of two Indo-Portuguese creoles,

Korlai Creole Portuguese (KP) and Daman Creole Portuguese (DP). Using
recently collected data, the phonology, pronominal systems, TMA markers,
syntactic properties, and lexical items of KP and DP are compared and con-
trasted. The question of the common vs. independent origin of KP and DP is
also discussed.
KEYWORDS: creole, creolization, pidgin, Indo-Portuguese, Korlai, Daman
Introduction
A significant collection of work is beginning to develop on the Portuguese-

based creoles in West Africa (d’Andrade & Kihm, 1992; Kihm, 1994;
Honório do Couto, 1994; Maurer, 1995; Lorenzino, 1998; to mention some of
the most recent publications). For the Asian-Portuguese creoles, we find an
increasing body of work as well, as evidenced by Theban (1975, 1977, 1985),
Smith (1977, 1979, 1984), Baxter (1988, 1990a, 1990b, 1994, 1996), Char-
pentier (1992), Clements (1990, 1991, 1992a, 1992b, 1993a, 1993b, 1996,
2001b, in press), Thurgood & Thurgood (1996), and Tomás (1992). With
1 A version of this paper was presented at the January 1999 annual meeting of the Society
for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Many thanks go to those who made helpful comments
at the meeting. Thanks also go to Mercy Pereira, Dominic Pereira, Paulo Remedios, Joyce
Remedios, Maria João Remedios, and Victor João da Crus Fernandes for their continued help
with the Daman Portuguese data. Thanks also to Theresa Titus Fernandes, Jerome Rosario,
Angelin Rosario, and Theresa Rosario for help with the KP data. Thanks to Richa Pauranik
for proofreading. All errors are, of course, our own.
192 J. CLANCY CLEMENTS AND ANDREW J. KOONTZ-GARBODEN
the exception of the work just mentioned, and a dissertation on Daman Por-
tuguese in 1960 (Santos Lopez, 1959–1960), the studies of Indo-Portuguese
creoles date back to the turn of the century (e.g. Coelho, 1880–1886; Dal-
gado, 1998a, 1998b; and Schuchardt, 1889). Comparative studies, such as
Hancock (1975) and Ferraz (1987), are based on the data from these scholars.
To date, no comprehensive comparisons have been attempted using recently
collected data from both newly discovered (e.g. Korlai) and already known
(e.g. Daman) Indo-Portuguese creoles.2 The present study seeks to bring
new data to bear on the comparison between the creoles of Korlai (KP) and
Daman (DP). After contrasting and comparing the grammars of these two
creoles, we discuss to what extent the results of the comparison offer any
insight into the independent formation of KP and DP or whether there may
have been any influence of KP in the formation of DP.
Historical Background
Before beginning the comparison between KP and DP, we review in

broad strokes some history of the areas in which these creoles emerged.3
The initial policy of the Portuguese in India was not to establish them-
selves there permanently, but rather to send annual expeditions to India to
bring back Indian commodities (Maharashtra State Gazetteer, p. 75). They
reached the southwest coast of the Indian subcontinent, at Calicut, in 1498
(cf. Map 1), and by the time they became aware of the Chaul area in 1505
(Fernandes, 1926, p. 66), they had decided to make their presence perma-
nent. By 1516, the Portuguese had been given permission by their crown
to establish a trading post in Chaul, which was fortified in 1524. Chaul, an
important trading center since the 6th century C.E., became a key control
point for Portuguese commerce during the 16th century.
2 Koontz-Garboden (2000) compares the phonologies of the creoles spoken in Korlai and
Batticaloa (Sri Lanka), using data from Clements (1996) and Smith (1977).
3 The historical information on Korlai and KP is adapted from Clements (1996); the
information on the historical sources for Daman and DP are indicated in the text. We note
there that there is much more historical information available on Daman than on Korlai. We
have incorporated as much as seemed reasonable for the present study. However, much of it
has yet to be collected from the archives in Lisbon and elsewhere, an undertaking planned for
future research on DP.
Map 1
(from Clements, 1996, p. xvi)
Across from the Chaul fort, a promontory overlooking the Chaul harbor
was at the heart of three major confrontations during the 16th century (see
Map 3). After the third dispute in 1594, the Portuguese finally took and
fortified the promontory. A village formed at its base, taking on the name
of the surrounding valley, Korlai, as its own. The inhabitants of this village
were speakers of the Portuguese creole of the area.
While the 17th century witnessed the decline of Chaul as a major trading
center for the Portuguese, the 18th century would see the Portuguese abandon
the Chaul area altogether. In 1740, the Hindu Marathas took the Mumbai
Map 2
(from Clements, 1996, p. xvii)

Map 3
(from Clements, 1996, p. xviii)

(formerly Bombay) area, Chaul, and the Korlai fort on the promontory (see
Map 3). All the Christians who were able to leave abandoned Chaul for Goa;
those that did not have the means to do so remained behind. The inhabitants
of Korlai, lower-caste Indian Christian tenant farmers, were the ones who
stayed. From 1740 to the present, Chaul and Korlai have been largely isolated
from Portuguese influence. The Portuguese presence in Korlai was maintained
only by one or two Portuguese-speaking parish priests in Chaul who most
likely communicated with the Korlai people in simple Portuguese, as was the
case in the creole-speaking communities in the Mumbai area in the early 20th
century (Dalgado, 1906, p. 143). The number of Christians in Chaul gradually
decreased, and at one point the parish priest shifted to Korlai (Meersman,
1972). The last Portuguese-speaking priest abandoned Korlai around in 1964,
after it was decided in Vatican II that the Catholic faithful should worship
in the vernacular of the place in which they live, which in Korlai’s case was
and is Marathi, an Indo-Aryan SOV language. Korlai currently has 775–800
native speakers of KP.
Daman was first reached by the Portuguese in 1523, but it was not until
1529 that they launched an offensive in the area. In Moniz (1923, pp. 14–
15), we read that the Portuguese were brutal in their onslaught of Daman,
attacking it from land as well as from the sea, burning all ships in the harbor.
They burned and destroyed the fort there as well, devastating the surrounding
villages, and assaulting their inhabitants. After the onslaught, Moniz (ibid.)
writes that the Portuguese soldiers pulled back, victorious, and returned to
Chaul, which reveals the importance of Chaul as a military center during this
time of Portuguese colonial expansion.
Daman, however, was not conquered in a day, nor only by soldiers based
in Chaul. Although the Portuguese attacked Daman in 1529, and then again
in 1534 with Portuguese forces from Chaul and Ormuz, it was not until
1559 that Daman was brought under the control of the Portuguese, who then
built a fort and organized a government with a military presence of 1200
men taken from Goa, Chaul, and Mumbai as well (Moniz, 1923, pp. 19–
24; see Map 1). In 1581, Daman was conceded the rights and privileges of a
Portuguese city (Moniz, 1923, p. 25). When in 1740 the Marathas took Chaul
and Bassein in the Portuguese Northern Province, in exchange they allowed
the Portuguese to keep Goa, Diu, and Daman (see Maps 1 and 2). This last
city was then reduced to a minor administrative presence in the Portuguese
empire. After 1740, although the Portuguese political influence in India was
minimal, Daman was still a cultural and commercial center during the 18th
and 19th centuries. In 1961, Daman, along with Diu and Goa, was taken
over by the Indian government, and given territorial status. That is, Daman
belongs to no state proper, but answers directly to the federal government.
Despite the fact that the Portuguese presence existed officially in Daman
only up until 1961, there remains even today an unmistakable Portuguese
presence there, apparent in the Catholic religion of the people, many of
whom still worship in the Portuguese language, and in Catholic schools that
taught Portuguese as a subject until 1993. Portuguese was again reinstated
as a subject matter in 2000, and some children currently study it in private
classes as well. In Daman, there are currently around 4000 native speakers
of DP.
With this overview of the histories of Korlai and Daman in mind, let
us return to the early days of the Portuguese colonization of India in the
16th century in order to consider the question of how the respective creoles
probably emerged. When Portugal began its colonization of India, 2,000 to
4,000 Portuguese men sailed to Asia annually, the majority ‘being able-bodied
and unmarried young men, bound for Golden Goa and further east, relatively
few of whom ever returned to Europe’ (Boxer, 1975, p. 67). For the most
part, these men were from the lower classes of Portuguese society (Boxer,
1963, p. 62). The Portuguese practiced miscegenation from the beginning
of the colonization. Indeed, the reason there were few if any Portuguese
women involved in the colonization was ‘the fact that so many Portuguese
men, including the soldados ‘soldiers’ preferred to live with a harem of slave
girls rather than to marry, at any rate in their younger and more virile days’
(Boxer, 1975, p. 68). The Portuguese casados (i.e. those who married) also
had concubines and often owned slaves as well, both men and women, to
carry out farm and other types of work (cf. Boxer, 1963, pp. 61–62).
From the beginning of the colonization of India, we find evidence of
Indo-Portuguese offspring. Fernão da Veiga, the judge in charge of the or-
phans in Goa, reported in 1516 via letter to the King of Portugal that 70
orphans, fathered by the Portuguese, were living from alms in Goa, and re-
quested money in order to provide for them. This type of situation must have
been prevalent at that time, not only in Goa, but also in Chaul, Daman, and
other settlements as well, given that an overseer of orphans became an official
posting in these Portuguese settlements. As an example, among the privileges
given to the city of Daman in 1581 by D. Henrique, King of Portugal, was

the appointment of a ‘clerk of the orphans’ (Moniz, 1923, p. 25).
As was their practice elsewhere, the Portuguese in the settlements in
India took it upon themselves to convert their slaves and their offspring to
Christianity (Boxer, 1963, pp. 59–60). The incorporation of Indo-Portuguese
offspring as well as native Indians into the Catholic church constituted a
new element in the Indian society, a society reasonably characterized as
one in which religious barriers were quite rigid and in which the social
structure, i.e. the caste system, was strict and hierarchical. By becoming
Christians, the lower-caste Indians became doubly isolated: first, they were
isolated from their erstwhile same-caste peers by their new religion, and
from their Portuguese ‘landlords’ by their lower caste. Boxer (1963, p. 75)
notes: ‘the Portuguese at first tried to abolish caste distinctions among their
Indian converts, but they soon found that this was impossible and they were
forced, however reluctantly, to compromise with this immensely powerful
and deep-rooted social and religious system.’
Boxer (1963, pp. 62–83) also tells us that the general caste system that
developed among the Christians in Portuguese India was as follows:
(1) Castes among Indian Christians

Reinol European-born Portuguese
(no term) Portuguese born in India of pure European parentage (very few)
Castiços people born of a European father and a Eurasian mother
Mestiços people born of Eurasian-Indian or Eurasian-Eurasian parents
Brahmins Corresponding to the Brahmin caste in Hinduism. In Hinduism
only Brahmins were allowed into the priesthood, and the Por-
tuguese followed this practice with their converts up until the
19th century.
Char(o)dos Corresponding to the Kshatriyan and Vaishyan castes in Hin-
duism; these were the warriors and merchants. Few of these
were ever ordained priests.
Shudras Corresponding to subgroups of the Vaishyan and Shudra castes
in Hinduism; this caste included some types of menial laborers,
peasants and artisans.
Corumbins Corresponding to part of the Shudra caste in Hinduism; mem-
bers of this caste were chiefly landless workers and peasants.
Farazes Corresponding to the pariahs or untouchables in Hinduism; the

professions of the Farazes were the most menial jobs such as
sweeping, grave-digging, etc.
Following a decree from Alfonso de Albuquerque, the second governor of

Portuguese India, the pure-blooded Portuguese attempted to marry higher-
caste Hindu women, but were unsuccessful. The Mestiços, and most likely
the Castiços as well, tried to marry pure-blooded Portuguese, only with
meager success as the Reinols and Brahmins alike tended to despise the
Mestiços/Castiços. These, in turn, were not friendly with purely Indian Chris-
tians of any caste (cf. Boxer, 1963, pp. 62–83). Given the above, all Chris-
tians, including the lower-caste Indian Christians, formed an extension of
the all-pervasive caste system. In fact, it was largely due to the barriers of
religion and caste that Korlai, Daman and their respective creole languages
themselves have been maintained up until today.
Regarding a possible scenario for the formation of the Portuguese creoles
of Korlai and Daman, we assume that when the Portuguese arrived in Chaul
and then later in Daman, they found that the Chaul and Daman populations
were mostly Marathi- and Gujarati-speaking Hindus respectively, although
both areas were under the rule of Muslim lords. It was the lower-caste Hindus
that the Portuguese enslaved and with whom they mixed (cf. Boxer, 1963, pp.
59–61). As we saw above, the first Portuguese to arrive in Chaul and Daman
were soldiers, most of whom were of socially lower classes (Boxer, 1963,
p. 62). It is reasonable to assume that these men, having traveled several
months in Africa before arriving to India, were at least familiar with some
form of pidgin Portuguese and could communicate in at least some mixture
of Portuguese foreigner talk and Portuguese pidgin. Moreover, they spoke
their own dialect of Portuguese, and possibly some of the lingua franca used
around the Mediterranean during medieval times (cf. Clements, 1992b, 1993a,
1993b). When communicating with the indigenous people, the Portuguese
most likely used any and all means available to them to make themselves
understood, as did their interlocutors.
What we have, then, are two cases of a two-language contact situation,
Portuguese-Marathi for KP and Portuguese-Gujarati for DP, with Portuguese
as the target language. More precisely, the target for the newly enslaved
and converted Indians was the language the soldiers spoke — most likely
a mixture of pidgin Portuguese, Portuguese foreigner talk, and any other
linguistic resource the soldiers might have developed. It is reasonable to

assume that because the Portuguese used pidgin and/or foreigner talk, the
Indians’ access to the standard colloquial Portuguese was partial at best, but
that their access to Portuguese pidgin etc. was good. Thus, faced with a
new living situation and presented with pidginized and/or simplified input
of a new language, which they were obliged to somehow learn — recall
that they did convert to Christianity, which entailed adopting a new language
and culture — the Indians would have tried their best to make themselves
understood, making guesses about what their Portuguese interlocutors would
understand. Guesses promoting intelligibility were arguably considered the
‘right’ guesses. Thus, the grammar of the incipient pidgin in Korlai, as well
as in Daman, was initially a direct reflection of the shared ‘right’ guesses
made by the shifting recent converts (cf. Thomason & Kaufman, 1988, pp.
152–153). Some of these guesses reflect the imprint of the native grammar
onto the variety of Portuguese being learned. For example, in 16th century
Portuguese, the verb ter ‘have’ expressed possession, as well as being used
as an auxiliary for the perfect tenses. Given that in Marathi and Gujarati the
existential verb was also the copula as well as the auxiliary for compound
tenses, and also was used to express possession, ter ended up performing
all of these functions in KP and all but the copulative functions in DP.
Moreover, lexical items like KP and DP p‰ ‘foot and leg’ (< Ptg. pê ‘foot’)
were reanalyzed on the Indo-Aryan model in which there is one word that
corresponds to ‘foot’ and ‘leg’. (Cf. Thomason & Kaufman, 1988, p. 153 for
a comparable situation in Sãotomense.)
In both Korlai and Daman, creolization occurred when the offspring of
the Indian slaves of the Portuguese began learning as a first language the
variety of Portuguese spoken by the soldiers and/or the slaves’ parents. It
is important to keep in mind that, from very early on, evidence such as the
fact that Portuguese soldiers kept harems of slave women suggests that there
existed a significant number of Indo-Portuguese (IP) offspring in Korlai and
Daman. Assuming this scenario, it seems to us justified to characterize the
type of creole formation in Korlai/Chaul as well as in Daman as abrupt cre-
olization (cf. Thomason & Kaufman, 1988, Ch. 6). In other words, before or
during the time pidgin Portuguese established itself among the newly con-
verted Christians, Indo-Portuguese offspring were exposed to and picked up
the pidgin, nativizing it, and thereby converted it into a creole. With the for-
mation of a new primary language and the adoption of new religious customs,
these new Christians forged a new identity. In this process, it is important

to keep in mind that after the lower-caste Hindus converted to Catholicism,
not only was their access to the higher caste Portuguese barred, but social
interactions with Hindus of their same caste decreased significantly because
of religion. It was not that they did not interact with the same-caste Hindus
or with Christians of other castes; rather, the range of interaction narrowed.
For example, where before they could not marry outside of their caste, after
they became Christian, they no longer married Hindus of comparable caste.
This is largely the case still in Korlai, though possibly somewhat less so in
Daman.
There is, however, the issue of two lectal varieties in Daman. As we
will see, the differences, found most notably in the respective pronominal
systems, can be accounted for by appealing to the relatively recent influence
of the lexifier on the variety spoken in the urban center in Small Daman, and
relatively less influence on the variety spoken in Badrapur, a geographically
separated community by Big Daman (see Map 4).
We have presented a possible scenario for the origin of KP and DP. To
recap: We assume that KP and DP emerged abruptly, as described above. In
Chaul/Korlai, the creole was probably spoken as early on as 1520. In Daman,
by the time Daman was given official status as a Portuguese city in 1581,
we assume DP was already being spoken, given that Daman was occupied
by the Portuguese around 1559.
It is an open question as to what input KP had in the formation of DP.
That is, DP could have formed under substantial KP influence or influence
from one or more IP creoles, or it may well have formed largely indepen-
dently of this input. After a comparative view of key aspects of KP and
DP grammar, we will return to this question to see whether there are any
unequivocal signs that point one way or another.
Comparison of KP and DP
Although the reasons for the differences between KP and DP grammars

may be fairly complex, there is one underlying general observation that can
account for some of them: from 1500 up to the present, the Portuguese mil-
itary, administrative, and cultural presence (including religion), was felt in
the Korlai area for around 235 years (between 1505 and 1740), in the last
Map 4
(adapted from Tomás, 1992: 67)
100 of which this presence decreased markedly. We saw that the first Por-
tuguese arrived in Chaul in 1505. KP formed around 1520, spoken by lower
caste Indian Christians in an area that waned in importance as a Portuguese
commercial center at the end of the 16th century (Clements, 1996, pp. 7–
12). In 1740, the vast majority of Portuguese left the Korlai area. Since that
time until today, the Portuguese influence has been minimal (i.e. Portuguese-
speaking priests until 1964). In contrast, Daman was a Portuguese colony
until 1961, and the Portuguese presence is still apparent today in Daman
churches and parochial schools. The creole in Daman arguably formed by
1581 and its speakers were initially lower-caste Indian Christians, as in Kor-
lai. Given that the community subsequently developed more diversity, the
Indo-Portuguese offspring became soldiers or part of lower middle and mid-
dle class who were traditionally, and are even today, employed principally
in schools and the government offices. Portuguese continues to be used in
church services, church choirs sing in Portuguese, and Portuguese is taught
as a second language in Catholic schools in the area (English is the schools’
primary medium). Thus, although few people speak standard Portuguese, its
presence, as well as the presence of English which has largely replaced Por-
tuguese, blocks large-scale influence from Gujarati, the regional language. It
is not surprising, then, that the general make-up of DP contains relatively
more Portuguese lexicon and structure, whereas more Marathi influence is
apparent in KP.
In examining the linguistic data, we will compare various areas of the KP
and DP grammar to determine to what extent the two grammars are similar
or different. Based upon this, we will then take up the question regarding the
possible influence of KP on the formation of DP.
Phonology
KP and DP have the same oral vowel inventory, shown in (2a), but differ
in their nasal vowel inventory in that in KP the mid nasal vowels are lax,
whereas they are tense in DP (cf. 2b).
(2) a. KP and DP: /i, e, ‰, a, E, Ø, o, u/4
b. KP: /ı̃, ‰̃, ã, Ø̃, ũ/; DP: /ı̃, ẽ, ã, õ, ũ/5
The consonantal phonemes of KP and DP are given in (3).
4 The linguistic data on KP is taken from Clements (1996, in press), while DP data are
taken from Dalgado (1903), dos Santos Lopes (1960), and largely unpublished fieldwork carried
out by Clements in 1991, 1995, 1999, and 2000 in Daman.
5 In our corpus, evidence of the existence of /E/ involves the pair mẼy ‘but’ and mãy
‘mother, more’, whereby we consider the nasalization on the vowels to be a case of progressive
nasalization.
(3) Consonants6
KP DP
/p, t, (T), k/ /p, t, k/
/b, d, (D), g/ /b, d, g/
/ts, tš/ /tš/
/dz, dž/ /dž/
/th, (Th), kh/ —
/bh, (dh), (gh)/ —
/f, s, š/ /f, s, š/
— /v, z, ž /
/l/ (lack of velar [l]) /l/ (presence of velar [l])
— /λ/
/m, n/ /m, n, ñ/
/r/ /r, r̃/
/w, y/ /w, y/
/h/ —
There are several points to note here. First, two facts reveal that the variety
to which the eventual first speakers of KP and DP had exposure was quite
accessible: the vowel inventory of KP and DP are virtually identical, and,
with the already noted exception of the two nasal vowels /‰̃, Ø̃/ the KP
and DP inventories correspond to those of Middle Portuguese (cf. Clements,
1996, p. 60). Given that the KP and DP grammars are, as we shall see,
far from standard Portuguese, the deduction to be made here is that the
initial speakers of KP and DP had ample access to the Portuguese pidgin
and/or Portuguese foreigner talk, but not to standard colloquial Portuguese
as spoken by the Portuguese colonialists among themselves. This pidgin, as
spoken by the Portuguese, would have had the phonological system of Middle
Portuguese. Secondly, KP exhibits greater influence from the regional Indo-
Aryan language than DP, visible in KP in the lack of the velar [l] allophone
and the presence of retroflex and aspirated consonants, some of which are
present only in loanwords from Marathi. The evidence of greater Portuguese
language influence on DP than on KP is seen by a presence of vibrant /r̃/
6 The phonemes in bold are those not shared by DP and KP, those in parentheses appear
only in Marathi loanwords found in KP. The phoneme represented by the symbol /r̃/ is a trilled
vibrant. The phonemes represented by /T/ and /D/ are retroflex counterparts to /t/ and /d/.
which does not exist in Gujarati. In KP, /r̃/ was reanalyzed as an aspirated
/rh/ (e.g. KP rhãya from Ptg. arranhar). The lack of the phoneme /ñ/ in
KP and its occasional presence in DP may point to subsequent Portuguese
influence in DP, as /ñ/ did not exist to the same extent in earlier Portuguese
as it did and does in more recent Portuguese (Williams, 1938, p. 23). Recall
that very often /n/ in Old Portuguese disappeared after nasalizing, as shown
in the example Vulgar Latin manu > Old and Modern Portuguese mão (cf.
Huber, 1933, p. 138). Thus, in Old Portuguese the nasal property in many
(but not all) words formed part of a vowel. For KP, a reflection of this is
illustrated in the examples in (4), where nasality is part of the stressed vowel,
but which corresponds to /ñ/ in DP.
(4) Ptg. earlier [vı̃yu] vs. later [viñu] ‘wine’
KP wı̃
DP wiñ or viñ
Because of adstrate influence, certain losses of or changes in phonemes
have affected KP more than DP, as shown in the examples in (5)–(7).
(5) Shift of /λ/ to /l/ in KP vs. maintenance of /λ/ in DP7
a. kulE ri vs. kuλeri ñ (< Ptg. culh/λ/er(e) ‘spoon’,
and culh/λ/erinha ‘teaspoon’)8

b. mul‰ r vs. muλe r (< Ptg. mulh/λ/er ‘woman’)
(6) Shift of Ptg. trilled [r̃] to [rh] in KP9 vs. maintenance of /r̃/ in DP.
a. mhara vs. mar̃a (< Ptg. amarr/r̃/ar ‘tie’)
b. rhapa vs. r̃apa (< Ptg. r/r̃/apaz)
c. rhãya vs. rraña (< Ptg. arranh[ñ]ar)
7 Although in KP [λ] is largely not present (one of a number of exceptions is KP uλa
‘look’ [< Ptg. olhar ‘look’]; cf. Clements, 1996, p. 75), its presence is stronger in DP, though
there is still evidence of its loss in word-final position, as in DP fil ‘child’ (< Ptg. filho ‘son’,
filha ‘daughter’) or w‰l or v‰l ‘old’ (< Ptg. velho ‘old’).
8 Thanks to a reviewer who pointed out that KP kulEri is more likely to be derived from
Middle Portuguese culher(e) ‘spoon’, with an epenthetic postonic vowel than from culherinha
‘teaspoon’. The crucial evidence here is the place of the tonic syllable in the two words:
culhe r(e) > kulE ri.
9 The aspirated consonant in KP words such as mhara is thought to be a development
from an unattested form marha, where we find word-internal [rh] as a reanalysis of [r̃]. For a
discussion of the phenomenon, see Clements (1996, p. 75).
(7) Shift of Ptg. /v/ to KP /w/ vs. maintenance or reintroduction in

DP of /v/:10
a. wak vs. vak (< Ptg. vaca ‘cow’)
b. w‰l vs. v‰λ (< Ptg. velho ‘old’)
c. wı̃ vs. viñ (< Ptg. vinho ‘wine’)
d. nob vs. nov (< Ptg. novo ‘new’)
e. ob vs. ov (alongside ow) (< Ptg. ovo ‘egg’)
Certain phonological processes found in KP are not present to the same ex-
tent in DP. For example, cluster reduction “Nasal+voiceless stop” > “voice-
less stop” is found systematically in KP, but only sporadically in DP. This
reduction is typical of Marathi, especially of the Marathi dialect spoken in
the Korlai area.
(8) KP DP
a. kata vs. kanta (< Ptg. cantar)
b. sı̃k vs. sink (< Ptg. cinco)
c. kopra vs. kompra (< Ptg. comprar)
d. nuk and nuk (< Ptg. nunca)
e. mitir and mitir (< Ptg. mentir)
The presence of this reductive phonological process in DP does not appear
to stem from KP influence but from the fact that it is also found in Gujarati,
though to a lesser extent than in Marathi. Turner (1915, p. 35) documents
the historical loss of nasals in stop+nasal clusters from Sanskrit to Gujarati,
writing that “in the group, nasal+stop or sibilant, the nasal is lost and the
preceding vowel lengthened and nasalized.” Some examples are given in (9).
(9) Sanskrit > Gujarati
nt >t dantaH > dã:t ‘tooth’
nk>k rankaH > rã:k ‘humble’
10 One finds both [w] and [v] in DP speakers’ speech. The labiodental realization [v] may
be indicative of subsequent influence of Portuguese on DP, since the alternation [v]–[w] can
be found in one and the same speaker, and is possibly an acrolectal feature. Two reviewers
suggest that the presence in KP and DP of [w] would be due to dialectal Portuguese. Latin
/w/, as in [wenire] ‘come’, became the labiodental fricative in Portuguese, French, Catalan
and Italian. Specifically in Portuguese, although Latin word-initial [w] generally became [v], it
occasionally became [b], [g], or [f] as well (Williams, 1938, p. 59), but there is no evidence of
Latin [w] remaining [w] in Portuguese. However, d’Andrade (p.c.), quoting Maldonado (1721)
and Feijó (1824), notes that [β ] and [v] have been found in European Portuguese for centuries
in central and northern areas of Portugal. This, along with the presence of a distinctive [v]
allophone of /w/ in Gujarati (cf. Masica, 1991, pp. 99–100), may have influenced DP.
The lack in KP of /z/ and /ž/ could have two causes. In 16th century
Portuguese, these sounds were the affricates /dz/ and /dž/, though it was just
around this period that they began to deaffricativize (Teyssier, 1984, pp. 49–
51). Moreover, Marathi does not have /z/, so even if /z/ were present in the
variety of Portuguese of the Korlai area, the Marathi speakers shifting to
that Portuguese variety would most likely have perceived /dz/. In DP, both
/z/ and /ž/ are present, which is not found in Gujarati (cf. Masica, 1991,
pp. 100–101).
(10) Lack in KP vs. maintenance in DP of /z/
kadz vs. kaz (< Ptg. cas/z/a ‘house’)
medz vs. mez (< Ptg. mes[z]mo‘same’)
Pronominal Paradigms
In general, KP and DP pronominal paradigms are quite similar, but there
are key differences, not only between the two creoles, but even between
different varieties, or registers, of DP. Unless we say otherwise, the lectal
differences in DP correspond to the more basilectal variety common in Big
Daman (DP1) and the more acrolectal variety heard in Small Daman (DP2)
(see Map 4). Having said this, however, both pronominal systems are often
found in stories told by the same speaker.
Subject Pronouns. The KP and DP subject pronoun inventories are
given in (11). DP distinguishes gender in 3sg (il ‘he’, ‰l ‘she’), which is
not the case in KP (el ‘s/he’). Moreover, DP2 does not distinguish between
2sg formal vs. informal, whereas DP1 does make the distinction. This non-
distinction in DP2 is found throughout the singular pronominal paradigms.
Neither KP nor DP makes the formal vs. informal distinction in the plural.
(11) KP and DP Subject Pronouns
KP DP1 DP2 KP DP1 DP2
1sg yo yo yo 1pl nØ nØs nØs
2sg wØ Øs —
2pl udzo usez usez
2sg use use use
3sg el il/‰l il/‰l11 3pl elo ilot ez
11 In DP1, the pronunciation of the masc. 3sg pronoun vacillates between [el] and [il]. In
DP2, however, it is more consistently [il].

For comparison, the Middle and Modern Portuguese subject pronouns are
given in (12).
(12) Middle and Modern Portuguese Subject Pronouns
sg. pl.
1 eu nós
2 tu vós
2 você vocês
3 ele/ela eles/elas
Both creoles take the first person subject pronouns from their Portuguese
counterpart (yo < eu, nØ, nØs < nós), KP and DP1 derive their second person
singular form from the 2pl form (wØ, Øs < vós), which was also used as an
honorific singular in Old and Middle Portuguese. The singular formal form
use in both creoles is derived from você. KP udzo is from Portuguese vocês
outros ‘you-pl others’, KP el and DP il (el) from ele, DP ‰l from ela, KP
elo and DP1 ilot (elot) from Portuguese eles outros ‘they others’, while DP2
ez is from Portuguese eles. The point here is that KP and DP share the
reanalyzed forms elo and ilot, and that pronouns are generally indicative of
a relatively deep relationship (cf. Schwegler, 1999 for a similar argument,
based on Arlotto, 1972: 188).
Object Pronouns. The KP and DP object pronoun inventories, given

in (13), contain no vestige of the Middle/Modern Portuguese clitic pronouns o
‘3S.MASC.ACC’, a ‘3S.FEM.ACC’, os ‘3P.MASC.ACC’, as ‘3P.FEM.ACC’,
lhe ‘3S.DAT’, lhes ‘3P.DAT’.
(13) Object Pronouns
1sg pari (<parmi) pa(r)mi ami 1pl pØnØ pEnØs anØs
2sg pØrØ pØrØs12 — 2pl pudzo pusez awsez
12 In DP, the key feature singled out as utterly distinctive of the difference between the
basilectal tØrt ‘twisted’ variety and the acrolectal pulit ‘polished’ variety is the use of Øs ‘2SFm’
and pØrØs ‘O2SFm’ instead of use ‘2SFr’ and puse ‘O2SFr’. That is, the use of the familiar
forms has become the symbol of basilectal DP. Thus, the expression fala Øs, pØrØs ‘talk 2SFm,
O2SFr’ is synonymous with the expression fala tØrt ‘talk twisted’. Cf. Clements (2001a) for a
more detailed discussion.
2sg puse puse awse

3sg pel pirel/ ayil/ 3pl pelo pilØ tayi(l)z
pir‰l ay‰l
Instead, they are derived from the combination of a preposition and a dis-
junctive pronoun. In KP and the more basilectal DP1, the marker is pV(r)
(< Ptg. para ‘for’), whereas in the more acrolectal DP2, it is a (< Ptg. a
‘marker of animate DOs and IOs), whereby /u/ of use, usez becomes a glide
[w], and the insertion of the glide [y] is found in the 3sg forms. Finally,
gender in the 3sg forms continues to be distinguished in DP. Here, DP1 ob-
ject pronouns again match up more closely with those of KP than with those
found in DP2. Given that the object marker a is seldom found in Dalgado’s
(1906) Daman texts, the DP2 pronominal system is best considered a more
recent development.
Possessive Determiners/Pronouns. Remarkable within the possessive

pronoun paradigm is that DP has two systems in the third person. In one of
these, the presence of su ‘his/her’ and suz ‘their’ appear to be vestiges of an
older system (cf. KP’s system). The fairly frequently attested su in DP may
possibly have been reinforced by the decreolizing influence of Portuguese
sua ‘his-, her-, their-SG.FEM’; the DP form suz ‘their’ (not equivalent to
Portuguese suas ‘his-, her-, their-PL.FEM’) is infrequently heard and only
in the oldest people’s speech.13 The other system in DP uses the marker
-d for the non-first person forms, where in KP we find no -d marker at all.
Given that this system is well documented in Dalgado (1906), it must have
13 The form suz does not occur in any of the recorded material collected by Clements,
but did occur in an 85 year old woman’s unrecorded speech. She was asked about the form and
confirmed that suz and dilot are synonymous. Younger speakers were asked about suz. A 55
year old said it was an antiquated form and never heard. When intially asked about the form
[suz], the woman first understood it as [sudž] ‘dirty’. Younger speakers do not recognize the
word.
Baxter (1990b; and in Holm, 1989: 287) states that Portuguese possessive determiner
phrases such as a nossa casa ‘our house’ (cf. Papia Kristang nos sa kaza [lit. we GEN house]
‘our house’ or the antiquated, polite phrase a senhora sua filha [lit. the madame her daughter]
‘madame’s daughter’ may have influenced the reanalysis of su. Extending this argument, pos-
sessive determiner phrases such as o nosso filho [u no su fi λu] ‘our son’ may have also had
an influence in su’s reanalysis. We note, however, that in neither KP nor DP do we find su
coocurring with a possessive determiner. That is, there are no forms such as KP *nØsu kadz,
but rather only nØ kadz ‘our house’.
developed well over 140 years ago. In DP, gender is again distinguished in
3sg. The formal vs. informal distinction in 2sg is maintained in KP and DP1,
but again not in DP2. As expected, the formal vs. informal distinction is lost
in the plural.
(14) Possessive Determiners/Pronouns:
1sg mi mi mi 1pl nØ nØs nØs
2sg wØ dØs —
2pl udzo dusez dusez
2sg use duse duse
3sg su dil/d‰l/su dil/d‰l/su 3pl sus dilot/suz dez
Deictic Determiners/Pronouns. Both DP and KP have a two-degree

system. KP replaced the first-person Portuguese deictic with one from Marathi
(KP ye ‘this’ < Marathi he ‘this.NEUT.SG’), while DP es ‘this’ is most likely
a conflation of Middle Portuguese este ‘this’, and esse ‘that next to you’.14
Both KP and DP possess akE, akEl (< Ptg. aquele ‘that over there’) as the
other-person deictic. Middle and Modern Portuguese have a three-degree
system (este, esse, aquele), while both Marathi and Gujarati display a two-
degree system. The creoles emerged with a two-degree system. Note that DP
distinguishes number with tud, though not obligatorily.
(15) Deictic Determiners/Pronouns
KP DP
Sg. Pl.
1st ye es es(tud)
2nd/3rd akE akEl akEl(tud)
Interrogative Pronouns. The set of KP and DP interrogative pro-

nouns displays two bimorphemic forms: kyØr, kØr ‘when’ (< Ptg. que hora
‘what hour’) and kilay, kil‰ ‘how’ (< Ptg. que laia ‘what manner’). Bi-
morphemic wh-words are common in pidgins and creoles (cf. Muysken
& Smith, 1990; Clements & Mahboob, 2000). Whereas other Portuguese-
based African and Asian creoles have reflexes of Portuguese que hora (cf.
14 In KP, there are vestiges of Portuguese este in forms like estyan ‘this year’ and ezØr
‘(at) this time’, but these are lexicalized chunks.

Clements & Mahboob, 2000, p. 463), the Portuguese reflexes of qui laia
are found only in Portuguese-based creoles in India and further east (e.g.
Sri Lankan Portuguese kilaay [Clements & Mahboob, 2000, p. 470] and
Papia Kristang klai [cf. Baxter, 1988, p. 190], and even Philippine Cre-
ole Spanish [cf. Forman, 1972: 109]). Thus, the form kil‰ may well have
originated in Korlai or possibly further south on the subcontinent (e.g. Can-
nanore, Cochin). In fact, this could be considered one piece of evidence in
favor of DP deriving from KP. Alternatively, the reflexes of que laia could
also have their origin in an Asian-Portuguese pidgin, a proposal advanced by
Clements (2000).
(16) Interrogative Pronouns
Portuguese KP DP
quem k‰̃ kẽ
que ki ki, ki koz
quando kØr, kØr ki, ki kyØr, kØn, kwan (acrol.)15
onde un un, ond (19th cent.)
por quê pEri (< pErki) purki
como kil‰ kilay, kom (acrol.)
quanto kãt kwãnt
qual kal kØl
TMA Systems
KP and DP TMA markers exhibit a number of noticeable similarities
in both form and function, while diverging in key areas as well. We break
these down into well-known categories taken from Holm (1988, p. 148;
1989, p. 267), with some modifications needed to discuss the specific TMA
features in KP and DP. We focus here on a comparative overview of the
15 Among more basilectal DP speakers, the perception of what is “pulit” (i.e. more acrolec-
tal) differs interestingly at times according to the age of the speaker. An example of this involves
the equivalents for ‘when’, kyØr and kwan. Many younger speakers (adolescents and young
adults) regard kyØr as the “pulit” form, whereas for their parents, adults around 45–55 years
old, kwan is clearly the more acrolectal of the two forms. What seems to be happening is the
following: kyØr was the basilectal form, which for some time now has been yielding ground
to kwan, such that when the younger speakers acquired basilectal DP, the default form they
learned for ‘when’ was kØn or kwan. Now kyØr is “the other” form, which they have labeled
“pulit”. Their parents, however, learned kyØr as the default form, and kØn or kwan as the
acrolectal form.
TMA markers and combinations thereof. For a more detailed discussion of

TMA markers in KP and DP, see Clements (1996, in press) and Clements
(in prep.) respectively.
Basic stem and Past forms. The basic stem and simple past forms are
given in (17).
(17)
Unmarked Forms Basic Stems
KP kata ‘sing’, kume ‘eat’, subi ‘go up’, tepu ‘heat up’
DP kanta ‘sing’, kume ‘eat’, subi ‘go up’, bEblu ‘mutter’
The KP/DP basic stem is derived from the Portuguese infinitive (i.e. cantar,
comer, subir), whereby the word-final consonant is deleted and syllable-final
stress maintained (e.g. [ka 'ta] < [kan'tar]).16 In both KP and DP, the bare stem
functions as an imperative and subjunctive form, as well as an infinitive, and
is the form to which elements are added (particles and/or affixes) to express
the different tense and aspect meanings.
The simple past, derived in both creoles from the Middle Portuguese
preterite form for both -ar and -er/ir verbs in both creoles, is formed by
replacing the final vowel with -o for verbs in -a, or by adding the glide -w
to verbs in -e, -i. The simple past for the verbs in -u is unmarked. Thus,
the basic stem/past tense form for KP tepu ‘heat up’ can refer either to the
present tense or the past tense, depending upon the context.17
16 In the case of kata, nasal deletion, found throughout KP before stops, has also taken
place. See Clements (1996, pp. 77–78) for details.

17 It is interesting that both KP and DP incorporated verbs taken from their respective
adstrate languages in the same way: they took a form in -u, although DP has far fewer borrowed
verbs than KP. In the case of Gujararti (DP’s adstrate language), both the imperative and
infinitival forms of the verb end in -u (Masica, 1991, pp. 260, 300), so DP speakers had/have
a fairly clear model from Gujarati. In the case of Marathi, the infinitive, in -e, was not a clear
model given its relative infrequency of occurrence. Because the Marathi informal imperative
forms often end in a consonant (e.g. kam kEr! ‘do [the] work!’), they also were a less than clear
form after which to model a base form in KP. KP speakers could have chosen to incorporate
the formal imperative verb form in -a (e.g. kam kEra ‘do [the] work!’). However, this may not
have been done because of the presence of KP verbs in -a, or because it was not as frequent.
By contrast, the negative imperative form in -u — uniformly used in all registers to express
the negative imperative as well as to request instruction (e.g. kam kEru nako(s) [lit. work do
(18)
Simple Past Forms
KP kato ‘sang’, kumew ‘ate’, subiw ‘went up’, tepu ‘heated up’
DP kanto ‘sing’, kumew ‘eat’, subiw ‘went up’, bEblu ‘muttered’
In both KP and DP, the simple past functions in a way quite similar to the
preterite in Middle Portuguese. The examples in (19) illustrate the canonical
use of the simple past in KP and DP: relating fully completed events that
took place at some point in the past.
(19a) Korlai Portuguese
[Pay] halo tud dEpEy nigri abriw port.
father said all then girl opened door
‘The father-in-law gave her everything [the code signs], then
the girl opened the door.’
(19b) Daman Portuguese
Entãw, rrey saiw p‰rt dE vEran, rrey ko
so, king went-out near GEN veranda, king with
rraı́n, I paso ũ milyaf.
queen and passed a eagle
‘So, the king went out onto the veranda, the king and queen,
and an eagle passed by.’
We find some variation in the respective KP and DP verb forms. Some
verbs in both creoles have lexicalized the erstwhile past marker já, though
KP seems to have more of such forms.18
(20) KP DP PTG
yafoy, yaho(y) jafoy < já foi ‘s/he already went’
yawe jayo < já veio ‘s/he already came’
NEG.IMP.FAM] ‘don’t do [the] work’, and kam kEru? ‘Shall I do the work?’ (Berntsen &
Nimbkar, 1982, pp. 134–146) — is a more frequently occurring form. It may be for this reason
that KP borrowed this form of the Marathi verb. It is worth noting that in both creoles a form
in -u is used to derive hypocoristics: KP Theresa => Teru; DP Dustin => Dustu.
18 Other Norteiro creoles also display this type of lexicalization. Cf. Clements (1990,
p. 130) for more information.

yade (ja)dew19 < já deu ‘s/he already gave’

ya fiko, yahiko, jhiko fiko < (já) ficou ‘s/he (already)
became/stayed’
jacho acho < (já) achou ‘s/he (already)
found/got’
Items such as ‘come’ and ‘go’ are some of the most frequently used verbs.
It is not surprising that these verbs are the ones that lexicalized with já.
However, for Portuguese já foy ‘s/he already went’ and já veio ‘s/he already
came’ to have lexicalized in KP and DP, the element já had to have been a
past marker, possibly already in Portuguese pidgin. Indeed, Naro (1978: 326)
finds evidence for this in portrayals of pidgin Portuguese found in plays of the
16th century. Although neither KP or DP currently have já as an obligatory
past marker, it is still used variably in DP beyond the functional domain of
DP já ‘already’, which also exists. In KP, já is used only as a proverb, as in
(21), taken from Clements (1996, p. 118).
(21) Question: Use siyo?
you-FORM had-dinner
‘Have you already had dinner?’
Answer: Ja.
‘Yes, I have.’
(Non-)Anterior. KP and DP mark the non-anterior with tE and te, and

the anterior with ti and ting (i.e. [tiN]) respectively. Of note is the similarity
between the different sets of forms.
(22) Anterior and non-anterior marking
Non-anterior Anterior
KP tE (< Ptg. tem ‘s/he has’) ti (< Ptg. tinha ‘s/he had’)
DP te (< Ptg. tem ‘s/he has’) ting (< Ptg. tinha ‘s/he had’)
As will become clear, the non-anterior markers are not used in all contexts,
whereas the anterior markers are.
19 The DP form jadew is preferred by some speakers. We take this to suggest that dew
has become more acceptable due to superstrate influence.

Progressive. The progressive forms in KP and DP, given in (23), are

again similar to one another both in form and function.
(23) Progressive marking

Present Past
KP (t‰) -n (< Ptg. -ndo) ti -n (< Ptg. -ndo)
DP te -n ting -n
Distinct in (23) is that the DP non-anterior marker te is obligatorily present,

while in KP the corresponding form, t‰, is only found in the speech of older
speakers. Although the forms used for the present progressive are slightly
different, they match up in function, as shown in (24), where the KP and DP
suffix -n marks the progressive.

Teru katan.
Teru singing
‘Teru is singing.’

Joyce te kantan agØr.
Joyce PRES sing-PROG now.
‘Joyce is singing right now.’
The difference in form between the KP and DP present progressive is

explained through the independent evolution of the two languages. Clements
(1990) documents the use of present tense prefixal te in the progressive in
the speech of older KP speakers. The study suggests that at a prior stage KP
marked the present tense as in DP. However, as a result of a typological shift
over the last 80–100 years, KP speakers have gradually stopped using the
present tense marker te in favor of using only the progressive suffix -n. Stated
another way, KP now marks non-anteriority in the progressive with a zero
morpheme. The KP present progressive and the DP present progressive can
therefore be considered identical in form and function, since it is clear that
KP used to mark non-anteriority prefixally and progressive aspect suffixally,
as in DP today.
To mark the progressive in the past, the anteriority markers ti/ting are
used. Representative examples are given in (25). Marking in KP and DP is
identical here, as well.
Teru ti kata-n katig.
Teru PAST sing-PROG song.
‘Teru was singing a/the song.’
Ting kaı́n chu, nEkEl lugar
PAST falling rain in-that place
‘Rain was falling in that place . . . ’
Habitual. Both KP and DP rigidly distinguish between progressive and

habitual aspect in the present tense.
(26) Habitual marking
Present Past
KP tE ti
DP -n ting -n; er dE, avidi (aydi)
The present habitual is obligatorily marked in KP by preposing the particle tE

to the base verb form. In DP, on the other hand, this distinction is made by a
zero morpheme (cf. (27)), similar to what we saw for the present progressive
in KP in (24a) above.
Teru tE kata katig.
Teru PRES-HAB sing song
‘Teru sings a/the song.’

KØn vi temp dE fri, pEnØs fEzen fri,
When come weather of cold O-1P do-PROG cold
sintin fri.
feel-PROG cold.
‘When the cold weather comes, we are cold, we feel cold.’
To express the past habitual, KP has only one form, whereas DP has at
least three competing forms. In KP, the marker ti is added to the base form
of the verb. In combination with the base form, ti here signals past tense, as
well as habitual aspect. An example is shown in (28).
(28) Teru ti kata katig
Teru PAST sing song
‘Teru {used to/would} sing a/the song.’
As shown in (25b), the form, ting -n, as in ting kantan [lit. PAST singing],
marks habituality in the past, but is also used for the past progressive in
DP. Thus, this form can be considered as having one general function, that
of marking Past Imperfective, whether it be an event in progress at a spe-
cific point in the past or a habitually occurring event in the past (illustrated
in (29)).
(29) yo pE pega pesh, nãw, ting andan pE por sØ
1S O/D/P20 catch fish No PAST going O/D/P putonly
‘Me, catching fish, no. [I] would go to put [them on the rope]
pE por ası̃, prega prega, ting pregan, I
O/D/P put such stick stick PAST sticking and
only, sticking them [together and hanging them on the rope] and
ting vin I kuzinyan. anoyt aydi vi kaz.
PAST coming and cooking night HAB-PAST comehouse
[then] I would come [back] and would cook. At night I would then
come home.’
In (29), we have an example of a second habitual past form, aydi vi
‘used to/would come’. As we will see below, avidi and its reduced aydi
(< Ptg. havia de ‘had to . . . ’) are also used to express counterfactuality.
Although not found in the stories collected, our elicited data revealed that
the DP past habitual has a third marker, er dE (< Ptg. era de ‘was of’), shown
in (30).
(30) Estyan kantor kantan tud duming.
this-year choir singing all Sunday
20 The gloss O/D/P stands for ‘object, directional, and purpose clause marker’.
An pasad er dE kanta sØ tud mes.

year past PAST-HAB sing only all month
‘This year the choir sings every Sunday. Last year, they sang once
every month.’
Although either one of these three forms can be used in DP to express the
past habitual, the er dE form is exclusively for the past habitual, whereas,
ti + -n and avidi/aydi have other functions along with the habitual.21 Thus,
when either of the latter forms are used, the proper interpretation will be
determined contextually.
Completive. The situation with the completive in KP and DP is sim-

ilar to that found for the progressive. First, the absence of the preposed
tense marker tE indicates the present tense in KP, where DP has te, though
variably.22 Additionally, as with the progressive, the completive aspect
marker is a suffix in both KP and DP. The use of the anterior ti/ting in
combination with this completive suffix indicates past perfect.
(31) Completive marking
Present Past
KP -d (< Ptg. -do) ti -d
DP (te) -d (< Ptg. -do) ting -d
Just as KP used to have overt marking with t‰ of the present progressive,

this was also the case for the marking of present perfect, just as it still is in
DP with te.
The examples given in (32)–(33), illustrate the similarity in function of
these two forms in the present and the past.
21Further study will have to determine whether there is any lectal differences between
the three markers. Clements’ informants said there was not, but in the stories collected, which
represent mostly basilectal DP, er dE is not found at all.
22 In the stories, there are some instances of te deletion in the present perfect. As yet it
is not clear whether there is a difference between the present perfect with vs. without te. This
will be the object of further research.
(32) Present
a. Ku Lwidz difludz hikad. (KP)
OBJ Lwidz cold become-PPART
‘Lwidz has gotten a cold.’
b. Yo nu sab kwãnt te kargad tud ali
1S NEG know how-much PRES loaded all there
dent, nEkEl kalãw. (DP)
inside in-that jar
‘I don’t know how much I’ve put inside that jar.’
(33) Past
a. Ali ki jafoy el, akE piken irmãw su amig
there when went 3S that little brother GEN friend
ti andad sirwis. (KP)
PAST go-PPART work
‘When he went there, that little brother’s friend had already left
for work.’
b. . . . ki mi fil tin nasid ko EkEl orel dE
COMP my son PAST born with that ear of
burr. (DP)
ass.
‘. . . because my son had been born with the ear of an ass.’
As regards the forms and functions of the completive, then, KP and DP are
again similar to one another, these forms and functions mirroring those of the
progressive. The differences found between KP and DP are the result of the
independent evolution of the two languages. The clearest example of this is
with the overt marking of present tense. KP rarely overtly marks the present
tense, whereas DP marks it almost always. Given that KP used to mark this
consistently, however, the forms can be considered historically identical to
one another.
Irrealis. In contrast to other areas of TMA marking, the irrealis markers

of DP and KP, shown in (34), are quite different from one another.
(34) Irrealis marking

Future Immediate Future/conditional Counterfactual
future
KP lE (< Ptg. t‰d (< Ptg. tem lE (< Ptg. logo ‘at ay (< Ptg. havia
logo ‘at de ‘s/he/it has once’) (de) ‘had to . . . ’)
once’) to . . . ’) ater (< Ptg.
ha ter ‘s/he/it
must/should have)
DP a (< Ptg. ha vay (< Ptg. vai a (< Ptg. ha de avidi/aydi (< Ptg.
de ‘s/he/it ‘s/he/it goes’) ‘s/he/it has to . . . ’) havia de ‘had
has to . . . ’) to . . . ’)
Whereas the KP future marker is derived from the MP adverb logo ‘at
once’,23 the DP irrealis marker is derived from the MP auxiliary verb ha
(de) ‘have to...’.24 Use of the KP marker is illustrated in (35), with a DP
23 A few KP speakers who had a close relation with the Portuguese-speaking priests
exhibit ad as a future marker. The example given below, pointed out by a reviewer, is an
excerpt of a story told by Francis Martis, a former sacristan of the Portuguese-speaking priests
and whose speech was reported on in Clements (1992b, 1993a).
(i) Aka parmi dize depay yo port ad abri; nãwter yo nupad abri
that O1S say then 1S door FUT open otherwise1S NEG-FUT open
port.
door
‘Tell me that, then I will open the door; otherwise I will not open the door.’
This speech is not representative of KP as spoken by the vast majority of Korlai speakers.
One occasionally hears ad used with the deontic meaning ‘should’, but not as a future marker.
Thus, it is not the case that KP and DP once shared or now share this particular feature. Other
elements from the priest register in this sentence are: dize (in KP we find exclusively hala and
occasionally fala), parmi (cf. pari) and nupad (cf. nupa), the KP negative future form (< Ptg.
não pode ‘s/he/it cannot’).
24 Hancock (1997, p. 485) notes that Schuchardt (1889) recorded lo as a future marker
in DP. In the relevant passage, it turns out that Schuchardt is referring unambiguously to
the Portuguese Creole of Mahé, and not to DP: ‘I [i.e. Schuchardt] obtained data on the
Indo-Portuguese from Mahé in 1884–1885 through Mr. W. Schmolck, pastor of the Chombala
Mission one and one-fourth hours from Mahé, and he in turn obtained them from an old
Portuguese gentleman, Mr. H. D’Cruz, who at an earlier time was an interpreter in Mahé’
[translation by Clements] (1889, p. 516). The piece of data in question is found in the sentence
Eu lo vay com vos [lit. 1S FUT go with you] ‘I will go with you’ (1889, p. 517).
example in (36). Note that in the prodosis, after the conjunction ‘if’, the KP
and DP forms differ: in KP we find the simple past, while in DP we have
the base form of the verb. These forms are obligatory in each case.
(35) Chu shi kaiw, nØ lE hika aki.
rain if fell, 1P FUT remain here.
‘If it rains, we’ll stay here.’
(36) SØ Øs fala pE angẽ, pErØs a manda
if 2S-FAM tell O/D/P someone O2S-FAM FUT order
mata yo, fElan.
kill 1S QUOT
‘ “If you tell anyone, I will have you killed,” he said.’
Both KP and DP also distinguish between future and a more immediate,
or intentional-type future tense, although each language does it differently.
Whereas KP’s form is taken from the Middle Portuguese tem de . . . ‘s/he/it
has to . . . ’ (e.g. tem de cantar ‘s/he has to sing’), the DP form comes from
the Middle Portuguese vay + infinitive ‘s/he/it is going to . . . ’ (e.g vai cantar
‘s/he is going to sing’). Representative examples are given in (37) for KP
and (38) for DP.
(37) AgØr nØ t‰d anda kadz.
Now 1P IMM-FUT go house
‘We’re going home now.’
(38) yo vay manda pE sekErtar pE ...
1S IMM-FUT order O/D/P secretary O/D/P . . .
‘I’m going to order the secretary to . . . ’
In both KP and DP, we find the use of the future marker in the apodosis
of hypothetical or conditional sentences, though it does not have the same
value in the two languages, as evidenced by the glosses in the examples in
(39)–(40), KP and DP respectively.
(39) el shi jave, el lE kata katig.
3S if came, 3S FUT sing song
‘If s/he {comes/came}, s/he {will/would} sing (the) song(s).’
(40) sØ ‰l vi, ‰l a kanta(s) kantig
If 3SF come 3SF FUT sing-IRR song
‘If she comes, she will sing a song.’
In KP, lE in (39) can be interpreted as future ‘will’ or conditional ‘would’,

whereas DP a only has a future reading. However, the main verb in the
apodosis has an optional final -s (e.g. kantas [< Ptg. cantasse ‘sing-PAST
SUBJUNCTIVE’]), which marks irrealis.
This same irrealis marker is also found in DP counterfactual. In both KP
and DP statements of counterfactuality, the past perfect form is found in the
prodosis (e.g. ti/ting vid ‘had come’) and both KP and DP share one form
in the apodosis, namely KP ay and DP avidi/aydi (cf. [34]). Examples are
given in (41)–(42).
(41) el shi ti vid, el {ay/ater} katakatig.
3S if PAST come-PPART 3S HYPO-MODAL singsong
‘If s/he had come, s/he would have sung the song(s).’
(42) sØ ‰l ting vid, ‰l (avidi/aydi) kanta(s).
if 3SF PAST come-PPART 3SF HYPO-MODAL sing-IRR
‘If she had come he would have sung the song(s).’
Regarding word order in the prodosis, the conjunction in KP must immedi-
ately precede the verb, whereas in DP it can but need not precede the verb
immediately, and in fact in (42) it does not precede it immediately.
Concluding remarks on TMA markers. KP and DP arose in relatively

homogeneous, two-language contact situations between a pidginized variety
of Portuguese on the one hand, and Marathi and Gujarati respectively on the
other. KP and DP are considered fort creoles, as opposed to plantation cre-
oles which formed under more heterogeneous circumstances and generally
involved more than two languages in their respective contact situations (cf.
Bickerton, 1981). Perhaps it is because of this that the TMA markers (pre-
posed elements and suffixes) as well as the categories, are somewhat distinct
from those of plantation creoles. KP and DP share (non)anterior, simple past
(both preposed element and suffix), perfect, and counterfactual markers. They
differ solely in the irrealis domain in that they have different markers for the
immediate future and future, and DP possesses an irrealis suffix (cf. kanta-s)
unknown to KP, and KP uses ater, not found in DP. Thus, the extent of the
correspondences in the form and function of the TMA markers of the two
creoles is remarkable. It suggests the possibility that the two languages may
be drawn from the same blueprint. What is less clear is whether the blueprint
for both creoles was the variety of pidgin Portuguese prevalent at that time,
or whether DP is an offshoot of KP.
The largest differences between the TMA systems of the two creoles
involve irrealis marking. These seem to have evolved independently. After
comparing other aspects of these two languages, we will return to the question
of why this is the case.
Some Syntactic Properties in KP and DP

Typologically, KP and DP are distinct. While KP has a predominance of
postpositions and is currently undergoing a transition from a head-initial to a
head-final language (Clements, 1990, 2001b; Koontz-Garboden, 2001) due to
the influence of Marathi, DP is decidedly a VO and prepositional language,
displaying only the initial signs of becoming a head-final language, in that its
pronouns (but not full NPs) may appear with postpositions, as well as with
prepositions (except the postposition junt ‘at, with’), as shown in (44).
(44) a. junt de Victor
with GEN Victor
‘with Victor; at Victor’s place’
b. dil junt
GEN-him with
‘with him; at his place’
c. dent dE akEl
inside GEN that
‘inside that’
The postpositional construction ‘pronoun’-junt in DP has existed at least
since around 1880, attested in Dalgado (1903), and we assume the other DP
adpositions allowed this construction from as early on. As for KP, the head-
initial => head-final transition documented in this creole has been underway
for at least the last 80–100 years, i.e. it is a fairly recent development.
Both KP and DP mark grammatical relations via adpositions. While the
nature of this marking is similar in both languages, the adpositions themselves
are sometimes different, as shown in the comparison in (45).
(45) Adpositions marking grammatical relations

KP DP
Acc./Dat.: pV- (pronominal) pV(r)- (pronominal)
ku/pEr (with NPs) pE(r)/(ko) (with NPs)25
Genitive: -su dE
(Pedru su kadz [lit. Pedru GEN house] ‘Pedru’s house’ vs.
kaz dE Pedru [lit. house GEN Pedru] ‘Pedru’s house’)
Instrum.: ku/-su dE/ko
Cause: rhEpEdE pur kawz dE
Location: dE, nE, bE, hEdgE nE (also dE in younger speakers)
(general)
Source: -su dE
Goal: —, dE, nE, b‰ —, pE(r)
itli ‘until’ ate ‘until’
Comitative: -su kosid junt d(E) NP; dE + pronoun + junt
(Lorens su kosid [lit. L.-su-with] ‘with L.’; su kosid ‘with
him/her’; junt dE Lorens ‘with-dE L’; dil junt ‘with him’)
The only shared markers are the elements KP pV(r)-, ku and DP pV(r)-, ku
that mark object case, the instrumental ku, ko, and the locative nE. Otherwise,
the markers are distinct in the two creoles.
A comparison of the constructions found in the comparative construction
reveals that DP shares the Portuguese structure, while KP exhibits a structure
25 In Dalgado (1903), we find one example of dative marking with com:

(i) Antão est hom’ pediu com est velh Qui dixá ficá anôt su caz
then this man asked O this old COMP let stay his night
‘Then this man asked this old man that he allow him to stay the night in his house.’
One reviewer points out that the ACC/DAT marker is also found in texts in Santos Lopez
(1960: 149–150), one example of which is given in (ii).
(ii) baı́ n’ossptal coũ filh bê
go L/D-hospital O son see
‘go to the hospital to see their son’
However, in Dalgado and Lopes Santos, these examples are few. In DP of today, ku is not
found as an ACC/DAT marker. Given that it is found in KP, as well as in Papia Kristang and
Tugu CP (cf. Baxter, 1988), it must be an old trait of the Lusoasian creoles.
which is neither Portuguese nor Marathi. In (46), we give a comparison of

the structures with adjectives, in (47) examples from both creoles.
(46) a. KP: NP1 more than {all/NP2} ADJ COPULA
b. DP: NP1 COPULA more ADJ than {all/NP2}
(47) a. NP1 is smaller than NP2
KP: Luiz mayz ki Pedru piken t‰
DP: Pedru t‰ may fin dE ki Mario
b. NP1 is the smallest of all
KP: Luiz mayz ki tud piken t‰
DP: Pedru e/t‰ may fin dE ki tud
The influence of Portuguese, then, is noticeable in DP given that it does not
have a construction even near to that of KP, Marathi, or Gujarati.
With respect to negation in KP and DP, nu(n) precedes both the auxiliary
and the main verb in both languages (cf. 48–49), as it is found in Middle
Portuguese and in southern Gujarati, but not as in Marathi, in which the
negative particle appears after the main verb, but preceding the auxiliary if
there is one.
(48) Korlai Portuguese
a. Teru nu t‰ kata
Teru NEG-PRES sing
‘Teru does not sing.’
b. Teru nu kato
Teru NEG sang
‘Teru did not sing.’
(49) Daman Portuguese
a. Mercy nu te kantan
Mercy NEG-PRES singing
‘Mercy is not singing.’
b. Mercy nu kanto
Mercy NEG sang
‘Mercy did not sing.’
The Lexicon
Out of the 208 core words in KP and DP (using the word list by Comrie
& Smith, 1977), 182 are derived from the same Portuguese base words. There
are 27 exceptions, which fall into two categories: Those in (50), i.e. those
pairs where in DP the word is from Middle Portuguese (or Gujarati) and in
KP it is from Marathi (MP flor, KP ful, DP flor,‘flower’), or where DP and KP
have taken different words from Middle Portuguese (MP [colloq.] gumitar,
KP gumita ‘vomit’; MP lanzar ‘throw’, DP lansa [lit. ‘throw, launch’]); and
those in (51), i.e. word pairs common in KP and DP which do not correspond
to the Middle Portuguese equivalents, such as MP como, KP kil‰ ‘how’, DP
kilay (< MP que laia ‘what manner’).
(50) Divergences in Basic Vocabulary KP and DP
English MP KP DP
a. bark (v.) urrar, uivar, hubya ladra
ladrar
b. big grande gran gran, tØmoyñ
c. breathe respirar suskar tuma reshpra
d. fat/grease manteiga manteg/adzeyt gordur/manteig
e. flower flor ful flor
f. fog nevoeiro fumas orvaλ
f . hit bater, dal bate (old: daλ)
da lhe [lit. give
(it to) him]
g. horn corno shing dãnch
h. leftside à esquerda dawri (badzu) ishkerd
i. mountain serra s‰r oyter (small), muntañ
j. narrow estreito chũch estret
k. push empurrar, loTu empErra
empuxar
l. round redondo gol r‰dØn
m. sand areia reti are
n. sew coser kudze kushtra
o. snow neve bErEf džel
p. think pensar wichar hedze pensa, bate kabes
q. this isto (neut.) ye es
r. vomit vomitar, gumita lansa
gumitar
(51) Commonalities in Basic Vocabulary KP and DP

English MP KP DP
a. at em nE nE
b. fat/grease manteiga manteg/adzeyt gordur/manteig
c. how como kil‰ kilay
d. when cuando kØr kyØr
e. moon lua luwar luwar, lu
(< Ptg. luar
‘moonlight’)
f. not não, nem nu, ni nun, nin
g. say dizer hala fala
h. see (perception) ver parse parse
i. split, open partir, abrir abri abri
Among the exceptions, then, the differences, listed in (50), are more
numerous than the commonalities, shown in (51).
Finally, KP and DP have one copulative verb in common, t‰/te ‘is/are’
and ti/ting ‘was/were’, from Portuguese tem ‘s/he/it has’/tinha ‘s/he/it had’,
with possible influence from Portuguese (es)ta ‘s/he/it is’. In addition, DP has
the copula e/er, from Portuguese é ‘s/he/it is’/era ‘s/he/it was’. Interestingly,
the semantic distinction between the two DP copulas is akin, but not identical,
to that found in Portuguese between estar ‘be (located or in a resultant state)’
and ser ‘be (inherently)’. Thus, in DP, to express location or typically event-
related, transitory, physical, emotional, or mental states, te/tin is used and
e/er is impossible (cf. [52]).
(52) a. Joyce te/*e kaz.
‘Joyce is (at) home.’ (location)
b. Joyce te/*e durmid.
‘Joyce is asleep.’ (event-related, transitory state)
c. Prat te/*e kebrad.
‘(The) plate is broken.’ (event-related, transitory state)
For any other copulative construction, either te/ti or e/er can be used, gen-
erally interchangeably. From the examples in (53), e in (53a) is preferred by
some informants. In (53b) ting is for some speakers not interchangeable with
er in the clause el er alt. Thus, there is still work to be done to figure out
the exact distribution of the DP copulas.
(53) a. Pay e/te v‰l.

‘Father is old.’
b. El kØn tin/er now, el er alt.
He when was young he was tall
‘When he was young, he was tall.’
In Dalgado (1903), there is mention of the distinction between e (<Portuguese
é), ta (< Portuguese esta) and te (< Portuguese tem). The latter two were
apparently separate forms then, but have now fused formally into te.
Discussion and Final Remarks
In undertaking this comparison of KP and DP using recent KP data

and DP material spanning the period from around 1860 to the present, our
primary goal has been to determine in which areas these two sister creoles
differ and in which they are alike. However, any judgment on how to account
for these similarities and differences will be at best incomplete, as we lack
the necessary data to determine this unambiguously. Nevertheless, we offer
here an analysis of the results of the comparison, which should be seen as
an initial assessment of the relation of KP and DP.
Based on the historical events, it is possible that the Daman area was
settled by soldiers who had resided in Chaul and who may have brought to
Daman dependents who were speakers of the Chaul-area creole. However,
it is also likely that such soldiers could have come alone, or come from
the Mumbai area, or even from further south. It is clear from the historical
records that soldiers from various settlements in the Indian subcontinent par-
ticipated in the attacks on Daman. Consequently, it is reasonable to assume
that there was a mixture of soldiers, from various places and with or without
dependents, who established themselves in the area. There may well have
also been newly arrived soldiers in the mixture given that during the 16th
century there was a yearly influx of 2,000 to 4,000 men into Asia from Por-
tugal. What these men had in common was, arguably, that they spoke some
variety of pidgin Portuguese. This variety may well have had a regional
flavor. Speakers of pidgin Portuguese would have most likely outnumbered
any Portuguese-based creole speakers among the settlers of Daman. Such
speakers would have been dependents of veteran Portuguese soldiers.
From a linguistic perspective, in a comparison of the phonologies of

the two creoles, we find a stronger Portuguese influence in a number of DP
sounds: the presence in DP of /z, ž/, not found in Marathi, KP, or Gujarati, but
present in Middle Portuguese (Teyssier, 1984, pp. 27–28), and increasingly
present later as the Portuguese affricates [dz], [dž], [ts], and [tš] fricativized
around or after after 1580. Note that both KP and DP have chu [tšu] ‘rain’
(< Middle Portuguese chuva [tšuva] ‘ditto’ vs. Modern Portuguese [šuva]). In
DP, however, one finds /kaz/ ‘house’ with a historical fricative (< Middle Por-
tuguese /kaza/ ‘ditto’), where in KP one encounters /kadz/. Neither Marathi,
KP, or Gujarati have /r̃/, present in DP. Moreover, DP exhibits the reintroduc-
tion of nasal consonants in words such as viñ (< Modern Portuguese [viñu]
‘wine’) which in KP and Middle Portuguese is [wı̃] and [vı̃yu] respectively.
What these data suggest, however, is that Portuguese has had a stronger in-
fluence on DP than on KP, but it does not shed direct light on the common
vs. independent origins of KP and DP.
In the pronominal system, we find an extremely high degree of simi-
larity between KP and DP. They have the originally bimorphemic kil‰, kilay
(< Portuguese que laia ‘what manner’) in common, which is exclusively an
Asian-Portuguese creole trait. One key difference is that DP developed a
novel possessive determiner/pronoun system based on the Portuguese geni-
tive marker dE not found in KP.
Within the TMA system, again the similarities are wide-ranging and
striking. An important difference, however, is found in the irrealis markers.
Although the creoles share the counterfactual marker ay and avidi (< Por-
tuguese havia (de) ‘she/it had to . . . ’), for the future and immediate future,
KP has lE and t‰d compared to DP’s a and vai. One could argue that lE
may have been DP’s original future marker, and was replaced by a at a later
stage. A counterargument to this is that the future marker a is also found
in the various Norteiro Indo-Portuguese creoles spoken in the Mumbai area
(Dalgado, 1906). For its part, KP shares lE with the IP creoles to the south
e.g. Sri Lankan Creole Portuguese (Dalgado, 1998b, p. 90) and to the east,
e.g. Malacca Creole Portuguese (Baxter, 1988, p. 126). Thus, the two future
markers a and lE belong to two different creole groups, both of which, how-
ever, share the same past and present TMA markers. Thus, there is a case, we
think, for KP and DP developing different future markers upon creolization.
As for the development of the different immediate future markers, KP t‰d
and DP vai, Holm (1989, p. 268) notes that the form vai ‘go’ (< Portuguese
vai ‘s/he/it goes’) is common to all Portuguese-based creoles. Whereas in KP,

vai is only found in the imperative (e.g. vai! ‘go!’) and in a request form (e.g.
yo vai? ‘Should I go?’), in DP it is the default form of ‘go’, upon which the
present and the future are based (e.g. yo vai kaz ‘I’m going home’, yo a vai
kaz ‘I will go home’). Thus, vai in DP lent itself naturally to the formation of
the immediate future, aided most likely by an identical pattern in Portuguese.
In KP, on the other hand, the present tense of ‘go’ is tana(n) (< tE anda(n)),
and the infinitive is anda, another significant difference between KP and DP.
We consider the KP immediate future form t‰d an independent development.
Again, we find evidence of Portuguese influence on DP to be a factor.
In the area of syntax, negation is virtually the same, and the differences
in word order are a recent development. As for adpositions, we find some
differences and some similarities. The latter involve the prefix pV (r)- used
for marking object case, the instrumental markers ku, ko, and the locative
nE, which are found in all Asian Portuguese creoles. The locative nE is
present in all Portuguese-based creoles. Thus, it is highly likely that these
elements entered KP and DP through pidgin Portuguese. Regarding the more
differentiated or specific adpositions expressing cause, source, ‘toward’, and
the comitative, these are quite different: cause KP rhEpEdE vs. DP pur kawz
dE, source KP -su vs. dE, ‘until’ KP itli vs. ate. In these cases, one could
make the argument of Portuguese influence on DP, but in the case of the
comitative, KP -su kosid (e.g. Lorens su kosid ‘with Lorenz’) vs. junt d(E)
NP or dE + pronoun + junt (e.g. junt dE Lorens ‘with Lorenz’; dil junt
‘with him’), we have here an independent development that has nothing to
do with Portuguese, but illustrates the influence of the regional languages
on the creoles. In both cases, we find postpositions instead of prepositions.
We cannot know whether this difference goes back to the formation of the
two creoles, but it is possible. As for the construction, the differences here
between KP and DP suggest again Portuguese influence in DP.
In the domain of the lexicon, the creoles share 88% of the core vocabu-
lary (182 of 208 items). The items not shared either have to do with Marathi
items adopted into KP (e.g. ful vs. flor ‘flower’), more recent Portuguese
words finding their way into DP (e.g. KP irgi ‘get up’ vs. DP lawnta ‘ditto’
where irgi is now obsolete, and lawnta (< Portuguese levantar ‘get up’) is
more recent), or simply different words taken from Portuguese (e.g. KP s‰r
vs. oyter ‘hill’), both of which were available in the 16th century. The only
item that hints at a possible influence of KP on DP is parse ‘perceive, seem’,
which is an amalgam of Portuguese perceber ‘perceive’ and parecer ‘seem’.

Although this could possibly have been from Portuguese pidgin, we were not
able to find it in other Indo-Portuguese creoles, such as Sri Lankan Creole
Portuguese, or in the Portuguese-based African creoles. Lastly, the copula
differences seem to be due to the now-common theme of the closer contact
between Portuguese and DP.
In conclusion, in the areas compared and contrasted between KP and
DP, one encounters a great deal of similarity, which, we argue, is to be
accounted for by positing a variety of pidgin Portuguese common to both.
Although both creoles developed in rather homogeneous contact situations,
the shifting speakers in each situation had pidgin Portuguese as their tar-
get. It is because of this that we have creoles in these communities, and
not something closer to colloquial Portuguese. Many of the differences be-
tween KP and DP are best understood, we believe, by assuming that DP was
more strongly influenced by Portuguese than KP. This assumption is justified
given the continuing role Portugal and the Portuguese have played in Daman
through the centuries, whereas in Korlai Portuguese influence was already
waning in the 17th century and ceased almost entirely after 1740. Finally,
the two domains where major differences are found between KP and DP that
is not due to stronger Portuguese influence on DP, i.e. the irrealis and spe-
cific spatio-temporal markers, are, we submit, a consequence of creolization,
that is, of developments that occurred in each creole independently. The only
piece of evidence which suggests a direct influence of KP on DP is the verb
parse, which could have traveled to Daman in the mouth of a KP speaker, or
could have been incorporated into the pidgin of the area and found its way
to Daman in that manner.
References
Arlotto, A. (1972). Introduction to historical linguistics. Lanham, MD:

University Press of America.
Baxter, A. N. (1988). A grammar of Kristang. Canberra: Dept. of Linguistics,
Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.
Baxter, A. N. (1990a). Some observations on verb serialization in Malacca
Creole Portuguese. Boletim de Filologia (Lisboa), 31, 161–184.
Baxter, A. N. (1990b). Notes on the Creole Portuguese of Bidau, East Timor.

JPCL, 5(1), 1–38.
Baxter, A. N. (1994). Um importante sincretismo no Português crioulo de
Malaca: a preposição multifuncional ku. In Celine Cunha (Ed.), Miscelânia
Celso Cunha (pp. 1–32). Rio de Janeiro: Melhoramentos.
Baxter, A. N. (1996). Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Pacific and
western Pacific Rim. In S. A. Wurm, P. Mühlhäusler & D. Tyron (Eds.),
Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and
the Americas (pp. 299–338). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bernstein, M. & Nimbkar, J. (1982). Structural patterns, book one. Pune:
Branthali and Marathi Abhyas Parishad.
Bickerton, D. (1981). Roots of language. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Boxer, C. (1963). Race relations in the Portuguese colonial empire. Oxford:
Clarendon.
Boxer, C. (1975). Women in Iberian expansion overseas, 1415–1815. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Charpentier, J-M. (1992). La survivance du créole portuguais “Makaı́sta” en
Extrême-Orient. In E. d’Andrade & A. Kihm (Eds.), Actas do colóquio
sobre crioulos de base lexical portuguesa (pp. 81–96). Lisbon: Colibri.
Clements, J. C. (1990). Deletion as an indicator of SVO => SOV shift.
Language Variation and Change, 2, 103–133.
Clements, J. C. (1991). The Indo-Portuguese creoles: Languages in transition.
Hispania, 74, 637–646.
Clements, J. C. (1992a). Elements of resistance in language contact-induced
change. In G. Davis & G. Iverson (Eds.), Explanation in Historical
Linguistics (pp. 41–58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clements, J. C. (1992b). On the origins of pidgin Portuguese. Journal of
Pidgin and Creole Languages, 7, 75–92.
Clements, J. C. (1993a). A contribution of an old creole to the origins of
pidgin Portuguese. In F. Byrne & J. Holm (Eds.), Atlantic meets Pacific:
A global view of pidginization and creolization (pp. 321–331). Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.
Clements, J. C. (1993b). Rejoinder to Naro’s ‘Arguing about Arguin’. Journal
of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 7, 119–124.
Clements, J. C. (1996). The Genesis of a language: The formation and
development of Korlai Portuguese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clements, J. C. (2000). Evidencia para a existência dum pidgin português

asiático. In E. d’Andrade, D. Pereira & M. A. Mota (Eds.), Crioulos de
base lexical portuguesa (pp. 185–200). Braga, PT: Associação Portuguesa
de Linguı́stica.
Clements, J. C. (2001a). Acrolect evolution and stigmatized speech in Daman
Creole Portuguese. Paper delivered at the conference Crioulos de base
lexical portuguesa e espanhola, 28–29 June, University of Coimbra,
Portugal.
Clements, J. C. (2001b). Word order shift and natural L2 acquisition in a
Portuguese creole. In C. Wiltshire & J. Camps (Eds.), Romance Syntax,
Semantics and L2 Acquisition (pp. 73–87). Amsterdam and Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Clements, J. C. (In press). Korlai Creole Portuguese (NØ Ling). In J. Holm &
P. Patrick (Eds.), Comparative creole syntax. London: Battleridge Press.
Clements, J. C. (In prep.). Daman Creole Portuguese: A grammar and texts.
Clements, J. C., & Mahboob, A. (2000). Wh-words and question formation
in pidgin/creole languages. In J. McWhorter (Ed.), Language change and
language contact in pidgins and creoles (pp. 459–497). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Coelho, F. A. (1880–1886). Os dialectos romanicos ou neolatinos na Africa,
Asia, e Amêrica. Boletim da Sociedade de Geografia de Lisboa. Repub-
lished in J. Morais-Barbosa (Ed.), Estudos lingüı́sticos crioulos. Lisbon:
Academia Internacional de Cultura Portuguesa.
Comrie, B., & Smith, N. (1977). Lingua descriptive studies: Questionnaire.
Lingua, 42, 1–72.
Dalgado, S. R. (1903). Dialecto indo-portugués de Damão. Ta-ssi-yang-kuo,
3, 35–67; 4, 515–522. (Printed also in an offprint of 36 pages).
Dalgado, S. R. (1906). Dialecto indo-português do Norte. Revista Lusitana,
9, 142–166; 193–228.
Dalgado, S. R. (1998a). Estudos sobre os crioulos indo-portugueses. (Edited
by M. I. Tomàs). Lisbon: Commissão Nacional para as Comemorações
dos Descobrimentos Portugueses.
Dalgado, S. R. (1998b). Dialecto indo-português de Ceilão. (Edited by
I. Smith). Lisbon: Commissão Nacional para as Comemorações dos
Descobrimentos Portugueses.
D’Andrade, E., & Kihm, A. (Eds.). (1992). Actas do colóquio sobre crioulos
de base lexical portuguesa. Lisbon: Colibri.
Fernandes, B. A. (1925–1926). Antiquities of Chaul. The Indo-Portuguese

Review and the Record of the Indo-Portuguese Association, 8, 65–71.
Ferraz, L. I. (1987). Portuguese creoles in West Africa and Asia. In G. G.
Gilbert (Ed.), Pidgin and creole languages. Essays in memory of John E.
Reinecke (pp. 337–360). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Forman, M. (1972). Zamboagueño texts with grammatical analysis. A study
of Philippine Creole Spanish. Cornell University dissertation. Ithaca, NY.
Hancock, I. (1975). Malacca Creole Portuguese: Asian, African or European?
Anthropological Linguistics, 17, 211–236.
Hancock, I. (1997). Review of The genesis of a language: The formation and
development of Korlai Portuguese by Clements, J. Clancy. Anthropological
Linguistics, 39, 484–486.
Holm, J. (1988–1989). Pidgins and Creoles, 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Honório do Couto, H. (1994). O crioulo português da Guiné-Bissau.
Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
Huber, J. (1933). Gramática do Português antigo. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste
Gulbenkian.
Kihm, A. (1994). Kriyol syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Koontz-Garboden, A. (2000). On the origins of the Indo-Portuguese creoles:
a phonological comparison of Batticaloa Creole Portuguese and Korlai
Creole Portuguese. In J. Auger & A. Word-Allbritton (Eds.), The CVC of
sociolinguistics: Contact, variation, and culture. Indiana Working Papers
in Linguistics, Vol. 2. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics
Club.
Koontz-Garboden, A. (2001). A stochastic OT approach to word order in
Korlai Portuguese. Paper delivered at the 37th annual meeting of the
Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, IL. April 20, 2001.
Lopez, M. M. dos Santos (1959–1960). Notas sobre o crioulo Português de
Damão. Dissertação de Licenciatura em Filologia Românica. Facultade de
Letras. Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Lorenzino, G. A. (1998). The Angolar Creole Portuguese of São Tomé: Its
grammar and sociolinguistic history. Munich–Newcastle: Lincom.
Feijó, Madureira (1824). Orthographia ou arte de escrever e pronunciar com
ccerto a lingua portugueza (10th edition). Impressaõ Regia.
Maharashtra State Gazeteer (1915). Bombay.
Maldonado, Caetano (1721). Regras da Lingua Portuguesa.
Masica, C. P. (1991). The Indo-Aryan languages. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
Maurer, P. (1995). L’angolar. un créole afro-portugais parlé à São Tomé.
Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
Meersman, A. (1972). Annual Reports of the Portuguese franciscans in India
1713–1883. Lisbon: Centro de Estudos Históricos Ultramarinos.
Moniz, A. F. (1923). Noticias e documentos para a historia de Damão: Antiga
provincia do norte, Vol. 1. Bastora: TIP. Rangel.
Muysken, P., & Smith, N. (1990). Question words in pidgin and creole
languages. In P. A. M. Seuren & S. S. Mufwene (Eds.), Issues in creole
Linguistics 28(4), 883–903.
Naro, A. (1978). A study on the origins of pidginization. Language, 54,
314–347.
Schwegler, A. (1999). Monogenesis revisited: The Spanish perspective.
In J. R. Rickford & S. Romaine (Eds.), Creole genesis, attitudes and
discourse (pp. 235–262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schuchardt, H. (1889). Allgemeineres über das Indoportugiesische (Asiopor-
tugiesische). Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 13, 476–516.
Smith, I. (1977). Sri Lanka Creole Portuguese phonology. Unpublished
Cornell University Ph.D. Dissertation.
Smith, I. (1979). Convergence in South Asia: A creole example. Lingua, 48,
193–222.
Smith, I. (1984). The development of morphosyntax in Sri Lanka Portuguese.
In M. Sebba & L. Todd (Eds.), York Papers in Linguistics (Papers from
the York Creole Conference, September 24–27, 1983) 11, 291–301.
Teyssier, P. (1984). História da lı́ngua Portuguesa. Lisbon: Sá da Costa.
Theban, L. (1975). From creole syntax to universal semantics. Paper pre-
sented at the International Conference on Pidgins and Creoles. Honalulu,
Hawaii.
Theban, L. (1977). “Indo-romanica. Estructura sintecticas em contacto”.
Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 22, 245–248.
Theban, L. (1985). Situacão e perspectivas do Português e dos crioulos de
origem portuguesa na India e no Sri-Lanka. Congresso sobre a situação
actual da lı́ngua portuguesa no mundo. Actas, vol. 1. Lisboa: Instituto de
Cultura e Lı́ngua Portuguesa, 269–286.
Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization,
and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Thurgood, E., & Thurgood, G. (1996). Aspect, tense, or aktionsart? The

particle ja in Kristang. JCPL, 11(1), 45–70.
Tomás, M. I. (1992). A presença africana nos crioulos portugueses do Oriente:
o crioulo de Damão. In E. d’Andrade & A. Kihm (Eds.), Actas do Colóquio
sobre Crioulos de Base Lexical Portuguesa (pp. 97–108). Lisbon: Colibri.
Turner, R. L. (1915). The Indo-Aryan nasals in Gujarati. In R. L. Turner
(1985, Ralph Lilley), Indo Aryan Linguistics. Delhi: Disha Publications.
Williams, E. (1938). From Latin to Portuguese. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.

Two Indo-Portuguese Creoles in Contrast PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Two Indo-Portuguese Creoles in Contrast PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 17:2. 191-236 (2002).  John Benjamins B.V.

TWO INDO-PORTUGUESE CREOLES IN CONTRAST 1

J. Clancy Clements Andrew J. Koontz-Garboden

This paper presents a comparative study of two Indo-Portuguese creoles,

KEYWORDS: creole, creolization, pidgin, Indo-Portuguese, Korlai, Daman

A significant collection of work is beginning to develop on the Portuguese-

Before beginning the comparison between KP and DP, we review in

(from Clements, 1996, p. xvi)

(from Clements, 1996, p. xvii)

(from Clements, 1996, p. xviii)

given to the city of Daman in 1581 by D. Henrique, King of Portugal, was

(1) Castes among Indian Christians

Farazes Corresponding to the pariahs or untouchables in Hinduism; the

Following a decree from Alfonso de Albuquerque, the second governor of

linguistic resource the soldiers might have developed. It is reasonable to

these new Christians forged a new identity. In this process, it is important

Although the reasons for the differences between KP and DP grammars

(adapted from Tomás, 1992: 67)

7 Although in KP [λ] is largely not present (one of a number of exceptions is KP uλa

(7) Shift of Ptg. /v/ to KP /w/ vs. maintenance or reintroduction in

DP2, however, it is more consistently [il].

Object Pronouns. The KP and DP object pronoun inventories, given

2sg puse puse awse

Possessive Determiners/Pronouns. Remarkable within the possessive

Deictic Determiners/Pronouns. Both DP and KP have a two-degree

Interrogative Pronouns. The set of KP and DP interrogative pro-

‘(at) this time’, but these are lexicalized chunks.

TMA markers and combinations thereof. For a more detailed discussion of

place. See Clements (1996, pp. 77–78) for details.

p. 130) for more information.

yade (ja)dew19 < já deu ‘s/he already gave’

(Non-)Anterior. KP and DP mark the non-anterior with tE and te, and

has become more acceptable due to superstrate influence.

Progressive. The progressive forms in KP and DP, given in (23), are

(23) Progressive marking

Distinct in (23) is that the DP non-anterior marker te is obligatorily present,

(24a) Korlai Portuguese

(24b) Daman Portuguese

The difference in form between the KP and DP present progressive is

Habitual. Both KP and DP rigidly distinguish between progressive and

The present habitual is obligatorily marked in KP by preposing the particle tE

(27b) Daman Portuguese

An pasad er dE kanta sØ tud mes.

Completive. The situation with the completive in KP and DP is sim-

Just as KP used to have overt marking with t‰ of the present progressive,

Irrealis. In contrast to other areas of TMA marking, the irrealis markers

(34) Irrealis marking

In KP, lE in (39) can be interpreted as future ‘will’ or conditional ‘would’,

Concluding remarks on TMA markers. KP and DP arose in relatively

Some Syntactic Properties in KP and DP

(45) Adpositions marking grammatical relations

25 In Dalgado (1903), we find one example of dative marking with com:

which is neither Portuguese nor Marathi. In (46), we give a comparison of

(51) Commonalities in Basic Vocabulary KP and DP

(53) a. Pay e/te v‰l.

Discussion and Final Remarks

In undertaking this comparison of KP and DP using recent KP data

From a linguistic perspective, in a comparison of the phonologies of

vai ‘s/he/it goes’) is common to all Portuguese-based creoles. Whereas in KP,

which is an amalgam of Portuguese perceber ‘perceive’ and parecer ‘seem’.

Arlotto, A. (1972). Introduction to historical linguistics. Lanham, MD:

Baxter, A. N. (1990b). Notes on the Creole Portuguese of Bidau, East Timor.

Clements, J. C. (2000). Evidencia para a existência dum pidgin português