Die Creol taal

250 years of Negerhollands texts

[p. 34]

7 Variation in Negerhollands texts

Part of the problem in dealing with historical materials is to determine exactly what type of speech is reflected by them. This problem is even greater in creole societies, where often dramatic linguistic differences occur within one speech community. The texts and word lists of 20th-century Negerhollands appear to represent one language type: the language of descendants of the old plantations slaves. In the 18th century both slaves and white creoles (the term ‘creole’ was used for all people born in the isles) spoke Negerhollands.

7.1 The diachronic dimension

Looking at all the available texts, there is first of all a diachronic dimension. The language has undergone a number of changes in the more than two centuries of its recorded existence. These changes can be of different types:

(a)	grammatical expansion, in a gradual process of creolization;
(b)	a gradual drift away from varieties close to the Dutch superstrate to true slave speech, more heavily influenced by non-Dutch patterns;
(c)	increasing exposure to English lexicon and grammar;
(d)	natural changes, similar to those occurring in any language;
(e)	processes of language decay and language death, in the long period during which Negerhollands was used less and less;
(f)	decreolization, i.e. shift away from the forms of the emerging creole under the influence of the (Dutch) standard in the early period.

We are just beginning to unravel these alternatives.

7.2 The stylistic dimension

An important factor to take into account also is stylistic variation. We know the 20th-century material represents a certain ‘register’ (i.e. stylistic variety of a language) of spoken Negerhollands, whereas with the 18th-century material it is sometimes unclear whether the occurrence of certain linguistic phenomena was only limited to a specific register of written Negerhollands. We know that different registers existed. We can be certain, for example, that the liturgic style encountered in the Bible translations was not the daily spoken language of the majority.

In many cases, our material reflects a superstrate-influenced variety of Negerhollands. The following factors contributed to this:

[p. 35]

(a)	our most important sources of Negerhollands are written documents;
(b)	most people who knew how to write were of European descent;
(c)	for many white people Negerhollands was a second language, or a first language in addition to other (esp. European) first languages;
(d)	many written texts were translations, i.e. texts with a direct model in a European language;
(e)	many of the texts we have are of an originally European type;
(f)	Negerhollands as a written language derived its standard orthography from Dutch, which is its superstrate language. This is not a guarantee for Dutch influence, but it certainly gives the material a Dutch impression;
(g)	the first language the slaves had learned to write was Dutch, which then served as a model.

This points to the possibility that the linguistic data from the earlier phases of Negerhollands were in the main based on a superstrate example (see also 7.1.f and 7.4). In the present anthology, several different textual types are represented: letters, Bible texts, hymns, songs, monologue, dialogue, spoken narrative and more.

With respect to the latter point (7.2.f), Oldendorp (original ms. p. 774, also quoted in Stein 1990:194-5) bases his decision for an etymological orthography (which was the usual case) instead of a phonetic one, on the following:

because there are a lot of Dutch words present in the Creole which are completely mutilated and would not look alike anymore if one were to write them differently; primarily however because the blacks who are learning to read, learn it the Dutch way; who one does not confuse then - and correctly so - through another way of writing, especially through other vowels, and does not make reading, for which they have little time anyway, even more difficult for them, and embarasses them when they see Dutch words in a Creole writing which are immediately known to them according to Dutch orthography but completely foreign [to them, H.d.B.] in a modified appearance. Furthermore, this orthography has been used and introduced already a long time ago in the Creole hymn-book and other small printed pieces, and the blacks who can read are used to it and convey it to others according to the same [orthography, or, booklets, H.d.B.]. It is necessary that in the spelling of this language, as with all [orthographies, H.d.B.], something certain and constant be laid down as its basis, and that one always use the same vowels in particular. And because of the

[p. 36]

4. Friedensthal on St. Croix

reasons adduced Dutch orthography is best suited for that.¹⁶ [faulty style unchanged, eds.]

In our material, the basilectal varieties of Negerhollands are certainly underrepresented. Its bias towards the acrolect (the variety closest to the European superstrate model) makes it difficult to obtain a picture of the exact positions of Negerhollands in the diachronic (7.1) and social (7.4) dimensions of its variation.

16 weil im criolischen eine Menge holländischer Wörter sich befindet, welche ganz verunstaltet werden und sich nicht mehr ähnlich sehen würden, wenn man sie anders schriebe; hauptsächlich aber deswegen, weil die Schwarzen, welche lesen lernen, es holländisch lernen; die man also billig durch eine andere Schreibart, sonderlich dutch andere selbstlautende Buchstaben, nicht irre, und ihnen das Lesen, wozu sie ohnedas wenig Zeit haben, nicht noch schwerer macht, und sie in Verwirrung setzt, wenn sie in einer criolischen Schrift holländische Wörter sehen, die ihnen nach der holländischen Orthographie gleich bekant, aber in einer veränderten Gestalt ganz fremd sind. Es ist auch diese Orthographie schon längst in dem criolischen Gesangbüchlein und anderen kleinen gedruckten Stücken gebraucht und eingeführt worden; und die Schwarzen, welche lesen können, sind daran gewöhnt, und bringen es andern nach derselben [denselben] bey. Es ist nothwendig, daß bey der Schreibung dieser Sprache, so wie bey allen, etwas gewisses und unveränderliches zum Grunde gelegt werde, und daß man sonderlich immer einerley Vocalen gebrauche. Und dazu schickt sich aus den angeführten Gründen die holländische Rechtschreibung am besten. [...] (Oldendorp, Rohmanuskript p. 774)

7.3 The geographical dimension

Another area where very little is known so far is differences between Negerhollands of the three islands (St. John, St. Croix, and St. Thomas) and between e.g. the town

[p. 37]

and the plantations in the countryside. More is known about differences in the importance of English: for example, St. Croix is the island where Negerhollands gave way to English (creole) earliest (Hesseling 1905). Auerbach paid some attention to this (see section 2) and confirms Oldendorp's observations in his Missionsgeschichte. The latter describes the language situation as follows (in Highfield & Barac's translation of Oldendorp 1777:263 = 1987:154) to which we have added portions from the manuscript of Oldendorp's publication:

English, German, Danish, Dutch, French, Spanish, and Creole are spoken in these islands. English and High German are the languages with which one can get by everywhere. Creole is spoken by the Negroes, as well as by everyone who has to communicate with them, [in the manuscript furthermore: they however do not all like to speak it with Whites, because it is the Negro language at the same time.] Therefore, the majority of the white inhabitants of the islands, particularly those who were born there, understand this language. (...) The number of languages is the cause of many people mixing one with the others, as well as for speaking many languages, though none well nor with purity. A knowledge of the English language is especially necessary in the towns. Since the white children are taken care of by Negro women and grow up among the Negro children, they learn first of all Creole, the Negro language. Sometimes they learn no other language properly. However, this language is spoken with more refinement by the white Creoles than by the Negroes. [Manuscript: and have their own expression- and speaking styles.] The English, on the other hand, do not learn Creole for the most part, and their slaves have to adjust to them in this matter. There are, therefore, large areas on St. Croix where the Negroes speak nothing but English.

7.4 The social dimension

Apparently, there was a great deal of variation in 18th-century Negerhollands even on St. Thomas; the newly emerged language had not yet crystallized. Still we find, starting in 1739, the first (dictated) letters in creole, but also in an African language. Anyhow, next to the creole of the slaves a type of ‘high creole’, spoken among the whites, emerged. Is the difference between the high creole and the slave language comparable with the difference between bakra tongo and nengre tongo in Surinam? The following preliminary discussion is mainly based on comments in the grammars.

To begin with, it transpires from remarks of Magens (1770) that there was a large difference in pronunciation between slave and white creoles. Thus, the slaves were said to leave out the Litteras Gutturales, presumably first of all the /r/ at the end of the syllable, and they were said to simplify consonant clusters. Furthermore, it is quite possible that the Zealandic Dutch [y] of 18th-century Negerhollands, which is represented as <y> or <ye> in the Danish texts, e.g. Magens 1770 grammar, belonged to a high register, while the field slaves already used the unrounded variant [i] that can be found in the 20th-century texts. The existence of such a variant is evidenced by stray cases of [i] instead of [y] in the 18th century. Thus, disregarding cases where one can explain such an [i] away as a Dutch dialectal variant of an [y] based upon an earlier

[p. 38]

West-Germanic diphthong [iu], we can find in Magens (1770) i.a. Natier ‘nature’ (p. 43), natierlik ‘natural’ (p. 46), Diffie ‘dove’ (p. 13, 35, 67, 68), Bik, bik ‘belly’ (p. 35), Parik ‘wig’ (p. 62), (na) bittie ‘outside’ (p. 25, 70). These correspond to the Standard Dutch forms natuur, natuurlijk, duifje ‘little dove’, buik, pruik, and buiten, respectively.

As regards morphology, the material we have is characterized by variability as well. Often one finds equivalent analytic and synthetic constructions, e.g. in plural formation, used at random, sometimes even in the very same sentence: die kind sender versus die kinders ‘the children’. Recall that documents often reflect white speech. It is worth noting that Magens (1770) explicitly ascribes the use of two Dutch endings to the whites: Diminutives were apparently expressed by whites and slaves with the adjective klein ‘little’, e.g. Die klein Kabaj ‘the little horse’. The ending -tje could be used as well, but mostly by the whites, e.g. Mie Montje ‘my little mouth’ (Magens 1770:11). See also kleentje ‘child’, a nominalizing diminutive of kleen/klein.

In addition, both slaves and whites formed the degrees of comparison apparently without Dutch endings. An example:

(23)	Klein ‘small’
	Meer klein ‘smaller’
	Meest klein ‘smallest’
	Alteveel klein ‘the very smallest (cf. Du. allerkleinst)’

Only in guut - Beeter - Best ‘good - better - best’ and veel - Meer - Meest ‘much/many - more - most’ have the Dutch forms been maintained. In some words the superlative could be expressed by the ending -ste, e.g. Die moojste ‘the handsomest’, but that was mostly done by the whites (Magens 1770:11-12).

Magens (1770) furthermore suggests that the passive in Negerhollands was used only rarely. Passives marking an action in progress were avoided. Nonetheless, a passive could occur, and then mostly in white speech. The passive auxiliary verbs were wort and bin. The latter is a present tense form. In the other tenses the infinitive wees was used in its place in combination with a tense particle (Magens 1770:19-22).

The exact nature of the bin/wees passive is not clear to us yet. Oldendorp (and to a certain extent Magens) treats it as a mere equivalent of the wort passive. Moreover, in view of the translations provided by Magens (1770) and certain grammatical properties of the bin passives that will be treated below, bin may very well (also) be the marker of a resultant passive.

From the examples in Magens (1770), it is clear that the passive, when used at all (and one must wonder to what extent this was simply to translate a Dutch passive), was expressed by a passive auxiliary verb and a Dutch past participle:

(24)	a.	Mie bin vervolgt.
		‘I am persecuted’ (process.or.state)
	b.	Mie wort vervolgt.
		‘I am persecuted’

[p. 39]

This is explicitly confirmed by an earlier remark in Magens on p. 16 to the effect that the auxiliary verb wort, which is particularly used by the whites, was connected with a passive participle. Example:

(25)	Christus ha wort gebooren of die Maegt Maria
	‘Christus was born from/by the Virgin Mary’.

Striking is here the combination of Dutch morphosyntax with the Creole tense particle ha ‘past’. Magens' remarks are confirmed by the extensive grammatical description of Negerhollands in the Oldendorp manuscript (Stein & Eroms forthcoming). Here, several pages are devoted to the passive, and it appears that a wide range of combinations of participles, auxiliaries and particles was possible. Oldendorp also confirms what Magens says about the restricted use of passives in Negerhollands.

Still there was a passive in the general creole of both whites and slaves, albeit only in the perfective form. On p. 16 of Magens it is noted that the perfective aspect marker ka regularly occurs in the creole instead of the passive auxiliary verb bin. In that case the verb stands i Praesenti Indicativi, in the uninflected stem form. Magens translates ka with ‘is’ in this case.

From the examples it is clear that we could have both passives expressing a completed continuing action and passives expressing a state:

(26)	a.	Die Man ka trou^17
		‘the man is married’
	b.	Die Hus ka bou
		‘the house has been built’

Magens does not mention, incidentally, that in the combination bin + adjective as well, bin could be replaced by ka, as appears from a grammatical remark in Oldendorp (1777), cited by Hesseling (1905:107). An example would be mi ka moe instead of mi ben moe. Hesseling interprets this ka as the description of a state resulting from an action in the past. See also (6) and (15) above. Thus, it is not impossible that all ka-passives must be interpreted as resultant passives (Bruyn and Veenstra, 1993). Another verb that is apparently used as a passive marker with the same meaning as the one with wort, but with a different meaning as the one with ka, is kom ‘come’ (<Du. kom), which was noticed by Oldendorp in the manuscript version of his book (Stein & Eroms forthcoming). It could be used both as a ‘state’ passive and as a ‘process/action’ passive. Oldendorp provides a contrast with the ka- and wort-passives:

(27)	die goed kom bederf	die goed ka bederf
	‘it is going to be rotten’	‘it is rotten’

17 See Stein's edition of the Oldendorp dictionary (Stein forthcoming a): n. 0559 ‘Man met Wief, die sender ka trouw’, ‘man and woman, who are married’.

[p. 40]

(28)	mi kom geliefd	mi woor/ben geliefd
	‘I am going to be loved’	‘I am loved’

He stressed the fact that the passive is unusual in Negerhollands except in liturgic writings. In daily use, and especially in the slave variant, the passive can be done without, and an expression in the form of an active construction is preferred. Oldendorp also mentions in his manuscript different possibilities for conjunctive constructions in which moe(t) ‘must’ (<Du. moet), and consequently the word da ‘that, if’, may play a role:

(29)	O da mi moe wees/woor/kom geliefd!
	‘O that I would be loved! (meaning: I wish I would be loved)’

(30)	a.	mi wensch, voor woor/wees/kom pardonneerd
	b.	da mi ben/woor/kom pardonneerd
	c.	dat mi moe woor/wees/kom pardonneerd
		‘I wish I will be excused’

Bare conjunctive constructions, or those with ka, often require the use of as ‘if’:

(31)	as sender sal wees geliefd
	‘if they would be loved’
	as sender sal ka woor geliefd
	‘if they would have been loved’
	em sal ka woor/ka wees/ka kom pardonneerd as em sal ka bed voor die
	‘he would have been excused if he would have asked for it’

Oldendorp says that ‘such’ passives (possibly referring to all complex passive constructions) are to be avoided when one intends to speak Creole. Also, one cannot form participles as one pleases, as they are uncriolisch (Ge.: ‘uncreole’) and are only understood by those who also speak Dutch or German. Instead of gedann, one should say ka doe ‘done’; gesprooken, ka praat ‘spoken’; gewaeld, ka vool ‘filled’ etc. This is a clear indication of the fact that those Dutch-derived participle verb forms we do encounter in the texts are not the result of a productive rule in Negerhollands. They were adopted from Dutch into Negerhollands in that form. They may have been part of a ‘mixed’ native variety of the creole, as spoken by whites.

Finally, something has to be said about the use of personal pronouns in the 18th century. Magens (1770:12-13) provides two forms for the plural in the nominative:

(32)	1st PL	Ons	Wellie
	2nd PL	Jender	Jeliie
	3rd PL	Sender	Sellie

[p. 41]

The same holds for the vocative, which is equal to the 2nd person plural. In the other cases the first form is always used: Ons, Jender, Sender. The handwritten grammar of the Herrnhut missionaries assigns the use of the -lie forms, and then only for reference to persons, to one single dialect of Negerhollands without indicating which dialect it is (Ms. 1802:10, 20; Hesseling 1905:97-98). In Oldendorp's grammar manuscript (Stein & Eroms forthcoming), probably the model of the 1802 grammar, the same is said, and the alternative forms jelli and selli are traced back to Low German (although both forms are solidly Dutch in origin).

Since the limitation in the use of the -lie forms betrays a Dutch perspective of form (-lie <Du. lieden ‘people’, as in Du. jullie ‘you.PL’ and (nonstandard) wullie ‘we’ and hullie, zullie ‘they’), it is not impossible that these exceptional forms were used particularly by whites. A possible indication for this is constituted by the following pair of examples that Magens (1770) provides in his chapter on declinations (Magens 1770:9-10):

(33)	Jender Blanko	‘you.PL, whites’
	Jellie Neeger	‘you.PL, negroes’

According to Hesseling the -lie forms occur especially in the texts from the Danish sources (see below). We are dealing here with texts for people in town, sometimes produced by white speakers of the creole such as Magens himself. This is another indirect indication that the -lie forms may have been used mostly by the whites. In Böhner's translations (± 1780) sellie occurs twice, but both times it is corrected and changed into sender. Notice also that in the 20th-century texts we do not have the lie-forms.

Unfortunately, we know hardly anything about linguistic variation within the two separate main groups themselves. Within the white group, variation may have been present between further subgroups, based on position in society, profession, and so on. For example, government officials were recruited especially from Danish families, and the majority of the planters were of Dutch descent. Not much is mentioned about this in the contemporary research literature, but it merits further investigation as white varieties are abundantly documented. In his research, Hesseling (1905) observed differences between the Danish and German missionaries. Some layers of society may not have used any creole at all. There are documents in European languages, to be sure, throughout the 18th and 19th centuries.

Within the slave community, the variation may have been even greater. Oldendorp mentions this in connection with the different linguistic backgrounds of the slaves (many different West African languages) and with the differences between newcomers (Bussals), slaves from other Caribbean islands, and native Virgin Islands slaves. Apart from the as yet unpublished body of Negerhollands letters written around 1750 by literate slaves (some are included in sections II, 1.1 and 2.1), there is hardly any linguistic documentation on which research into this matter could be based.

Important contemporary observers of the sociolinguistic context of late 18th-century Negerhollands were the white missionaries. In section 2 we saw Auerbach's comments, and throughout his grammatical study, Magens also took notice

[p. 42]

of the social dimension of linguistic variation in the Negerhollands-speaking population. The most explicit reports come from Oldendorp, in the original manuscript of the Mission History. About the pronunciation of the slaves, he says (Oldendorp, ms. p. 808, also quoted in Stein 1990:195):

It is as if this language had been deliberately invented to make speaking with the whites really easy for the newly arriving Guinean blacks, and to make them fit for that in a short time. They also pick it up very quickly, and they have a great ability for learning languages anyway. Yet there are many who came from Guinea when they were already very old, who never learn it well. Such people say that they do not have two tongues; they do learn some Creole, mix some Guinean through it, or pronounce the Creole according to their Guinean accent. (...) Many speak pure Creole, however immensely fast, and according to their heavy Guinean pronunciation. Most words they keep half in their mouths or they utter them so unclearly that one does not know what it should mean. It is for this reason that someone who can speak creole well does not for that reason really understand each black: that lengthy practice is required for that and yet sometimes the help of an interpreter is called for who has to explain the creole intermingled with Guinean.¹⁸

In general, Oldendorp seems to be conscious of the fact that he (like the missionaries) speaks and writes an idealized variety of Negerhollands, or at least one that closely approaches Dutch with respect to the representation of its pronunciation.

18 Es ist als wäre diese Sprache mit Fleiß erfunden worden, den ankommenden guineischen Schwarzen das Reden mit den Blanken recht leicht, und sie in kurzer Zeit dazu geschickt zu machen. Sie fassen sie auch sehr geschwind, und haben überhaupt eine große Fähigkeit, Sprachen zu lernen. Indesse giebt es doch manche, die schon sehr alt aus Guinea gekommen sind, welche sie niemals recht lernen. Solche sagen, daß sie nicht zwo Zungen haben, lernen wol etwas criolisch, mengen aber guineisch hinein, oder sprechen das criolische nach ihrer guineischen Mundart aus. [...] Manche reden rein criolisch, aber ungemein geschwind, und nach ihrer schweren guineischen Aussprache. Die meisten Wörter behalten sie halb im Munde, oder bringen sie so undeutlich heraus, daß man nicht weiß, was es sagen soll. Es ist hieraus, daß jemand, der gut criolisch kann, deßwegen nicht einen jeden Schwarzen recht versteht: daß dazu eine lange Übung gehört, und dennoch bisweilen ein Dolmetscher zu Hülfe gerufen werden muß, der das mit guineischem vermischte criolisch erkläre.

7.5 The focussing of the language

While Negerhollands was probably highly variable in the 18th century, it gradually was used less and less by the upper and middle classes, and ultimately stabilized as the slave language recorded in the 20th century. A working hypothesis that so far has been profitable is that ‘high’ or ‘acrolectal’ variants have disappeared, and that ‘low’ or ‘basilectal’ variants have survived.

A comparison of the 18th-century sources and the 20th-century materials suggests, to begin with:

[p. 43]

(a)	the deletion of /r/ and consonant cluster reduction is also fully documented in de Josselin de Jong's (1926) texts, as well as in Nelson (1936);
(b)	apart from me:, ‘meer’, me:stə ‘most’, be:tə(r) etc. ‘better’, bes ‘best’, and also a -ste-form: gro:stə ‘greatest’ next to anglicized: hogis ‘highest’, di langis ‘longest (adv.)’ no other morphological comparatives and superlatives occur in de Josselin de Jong's (1926) texts. This question merits further research;
(c)	there are no morphological diminutives any more, except for fixed, petrified, diminutive forms (hofi ‘garden’, kalfi ‘calf’);
(d)	there is no longer a passive with wort, only with ka;
(e)	of the -lie-forms only sel appears in de Josselin de Jong's (1926) texts, and this is clearly an unusual form in these materials.

However, it is still a daunting task to make sense of the variation in the earlier materials; the nature of the difficulties will become clear when we consider the missionary activities and writings more closely.

One example of research recently undertaken in this domain has been the investigation of reflexive pronouns in 18th-century Negerhollands. This research was the first quantitative study on the 18th-century manuscript material. In van der Voort and Muysken (to appear) we looked for variation in reflexive usage. Until recently, it has been defended that, following its tendency as a creole to non-ambiguity, Negerhollands made a more consistent distinction between reflexive and non-reflexive use of pronouns (through the use of an exclusively reflexive pronoun sie and/or a reflexive disambiguating marker selv) than its potential non-creole superstrate models like Dutch, German and Danish. Part of the establishment of such consistency appeared to be due rather to the one-sidedness of the source material (mostly Danish Lutheran) that was available before the edition project started, than to the tendency to strict transparency in Negerhollands. We now have access to several different versions of texts derived from the New Testament, the Old Testament and others by the Moravian Brethren. It appears that there is considerable variation. One of the conclusions supported by the variance in the reflexives when compared to yet other sources of Negerhollands is that Negerhollands as a whole in time became more and more exclusively creole-like. Also, the Moravian documents are more basilectal than the Danish texts, as far as reflexives are concerned.

Another example of research of a similar nature concerns plural marking in the Slave Letters (Stein forthcoming b, Stein & Beck forthcoming).