sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bahamian English, Liberian English, Pakistani English, Zimbabwean English

BerndKortmann and Kerstin Lunkenheimer lntroduction

1 Backgroundand history of this atlas

This atlas offers a large-scaletypological survey of morphoslmtactic variation in the Anglophone world, basedon the analysisof 3OLl and 18indigenized L2varieties of English as well 25 English-basedpidgins and creolesfrom eight different world regions (Africa, , the British Isles, the Caribbean,North America, the Pacific, South and SoutheastAsia and, as the borderline caseof an Anglophone world region, the South Atlantic). It is the outgrowth of a major electronic databaseand open accessresearch tool edited by the present editors in 2Oll (The electronicWord Atlas of Varietiesof English,short: eWAVEThttp://www.ewave- atlas.org/) and is a direct, but far more comprehensivefollow-up of the interactive CD-ROMaccompanying the Mouton de GruyterHandbook of Varietiesof English(Kortmann et al. 2oo4), Whereasthe grammar part of the latter survey was based on 75 morphoslmtacticfeatures in 46 varieties of English and English-based and creoles worldwide, its successor,the WAVEdatabase (WAVE short for: World Atlas of Vaiation in English),holds information on 235morphosyntactic features in74 datasets, i.e. about five times as much de- tail and information. The idea underlying the design of WAVEwas to createa considerablylarger and more @ fine-graineddatabase and researchtool than back in 20O4,especially one that is less Ll-centred. As a proper atlas should, WAVEis intended to survey and map the morphosyntacticvariation spacein the Anglophone world and to help us explore how much of this variation spaceis made use of in different (clustersof) varieties of English, and to what extent it is possibleto correlatethe structural profiles for indi- vidual and goups of varietieswith, for example, geography,socio-history or generalprocesses of change,language acquisition and languagecontact. Essentially,WAVE wants to take further the idea of the 2OO4CD-ROM of creating a unified platform and databasewhich allows all membersof the researchcom- o munity to engagein large-scaletypology-style comparisons of the morphosyntacticstructures of the spon- taneousspoken (nonstandard) Englishesaround the world. So eWAVEand the presentvolume can be con- z sidered to be the counterparts of what, on the one hand, the online WALS(The World Atlas of Language StructuresOnline, Dryer and Haspelmath,eds. 2011;http://wals.info) and the print WALS(Haspelmath et al. F 2OO5)have successfullybeen doing together for languagetypology in recent years and what, on the other

N hand, the APiCS(Atlas of Pidginand CreoleStructures; Michaelis et al., to appear2Ol3), again both as online FK tool and print publication, will soonbe doing especiallyfor creolists,typologists and researcherson language Eo contact. The parallels pointed to here between WAVE,on the one hand, and the two big atlas proiects de- .N signed and hosted at the Max-PlanckInstitute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig (Germany),on the @.6 ^r other hand, are neither a sign of hubris nor a coincidence:WAVE was designedin part in consultation with E6 SusanneMichaelis and Martin Haspelmath of the MPI and, most importanfly, not only was eWAVEpro- qhFZ Xo grammedby and is it hosted at the MPI, all the maps in the presentvolume havebeen producedby the same 14; person(well, magician rather) who also signedresponsible for all maps in WALSand is currently in chargeof a9 all three maior MPl-hostedinteractive electronic tools (WALSonline, eWAVE,and APiCS),Hans-fiirg Bibiko o- }4F (seeAcknowledgements below). In passing, it may also be noted that a sizable number of contributors to ai ce (including ;> APiCSfor English-basedpidgins and creoles one of the editors,Magnus Huber) have also provided =o the data for WAVEand authored chaptersin the presentvolume. sax =: In the following sectionwe will first give someinformation on the data in WAVE(i.e. details on the choice 5v and classificationof the varietiescovered, the compositionof the featureset, the ratrng system,strengths and weaknessesof the approach chosen)before opening the curtain, after all, in section 3 and telling the reader about the overall structure of this volume and what they can expectto find in the individual chapters.Suffice it to stressat this point already that, although basedon the samedataset, the presentvolume and eWAVEare stand-alonepublications and researchtools, whoseuse in tandemwill definitely be of greatvalue since each 2 - BerndKortmann and Kerstin Lunkenheimer

tool can do what the other cannot. The chaptersin the presentvolume are specifically desigaedas keys to seeingbehind all the variation that is (and is not) documentedin eWAVE,both in the 55 chapterson the in- dividual varietiesand and creolelanguages and, especially,in the 1Osynoptic chapterson larger geo- graphical and typological setsofvarieties. Sufficeit to stress,too, that even though eWAVEclearly replaces the electronic researchtool going with the Handbook of Varietiesof Englishfrom 20O4,the chaptersin the presentvolume do not replace,but rather complement,the chaptersin the Handbookitself, as will be further detailed in section3.

2 Thedata

2.1 Varietiesand variety Upes

Table I provides an overview of the varieties, pidgins and creolessampled in WAVE,and their distribution acrossvariety types and world regions.Bold print indicates those data setscovered in one of the 55 descrip- tive chaptersin the presentvolume:

Ll (30) L2 (18) P(7)&c(re) Iow-contadLT(70) hlgh-contodLT(20)

Brltlsh lsles (11): Orkneyand Shetland E, lrlsh E,Welsh E, taltese Ea BritishCreole u l{orth of England, manxE, 5W of England, Channellsland E SEof England, East Anglaa, Scottish E l{orth America(10): 1{ewfoundlandE, Colloquia[American E, ChicanoE Gutlah AppalachianE, UrbanAfrican Ameri- Ozark E canVernacular E, RuralAfrican American SoutheastAmerican VernacularE, Enclavedialects EarUerAfrican AmericanVernacular E Carlbbean(13): BahamianE JamaicanE famaicanC, BahamianC, BarbadlanC (Baian), BellzeanC, N FF TrinidadianC, Eo Easternmaroon C, .d Sranan, xv Salamaccan, :6 GuyaneseC, Eb\ SanAndres C, EZ U,.n VincentlanC v. Afrlca (16): LlberlanSettler E, GhanaianE, .-.E GhanalanPldgln, Whlte SouthAfrlcan E, l{lgerlan :q E, l{lgerlanPldgln, q2- WhiteZimbabwean E CameroonE, CameroonPidgin, vd KenyanE, Krio, q:..: '64 TanzanianE, VernacularLiberian E *b UgandanE, e5 BlackSouth African E, IndianSouth African E Southand ColloquialSlngapore E IndlanE, ButlerE SoutheastAsia (7): PakistanE, Sri LankaE, HongKong E, talaysian E Introduction- 3

Australia (5):b AborlginalE, TorresStrait C, AustralianE, RoperRiver C (Kriol) AustralianVernacular E Pacific (8):b NewZealand E CotloquiatFiii E, HawaiianC, AcrolectalFiii E Bislama, l{orPk, TokPisin, PalmerstonE South Atlantlc (3):t St. HelenaE, Tristanda Cunha E, Falklandlsland E

a Obviously,MaltE is not a Britishlsles variety. lt hasbeen grouped with the British lsles in this table for practical reasons, as it is theonly non-British European variety in our sample, but ofcourse it has not been included in any ofthe calculations forthe British lslesin the regional and typological profiles in this volume. b Australiaand the Pacific have been treated as one region for the purposes ofthe regional profiles (cf. Siegel, this volume). . Withonly three varieties, the South Atlantic region is too small to be represented bya regionalprofile. But note that exactly the samethree varieties are also grouped as (lesser-known) varieties of Englishin the South Atlantic in Schreier et al.(2011).

Table1: Overview ofthe 74 WAVE varieties by world region and variety type

The 74 varieties representedin WAVEhave been categorizedin terms of eight Anglophone world regions b0 and five variety types. Geographically,we distinguish between varieties spoken in the British Isles, North America, the Caribbean,Africa, South and SoutheastAsia, Australia, the Pacific, and the South Atlantic. The typological distinctions are inspired by Trudgill's (2009,2011) suggestion that the 'true typological split' betweendifferent kinds ofvarieties of English involveswhether or not languageor dialect contact has played an important part in their development.For WAVE,we broadly distinguish betweennadve-speaker varieties (Ll), institutionalized second-languagevarieties (L2), and English-basedpidgins and creoles(P/C), with the Ll varieties again divided into traditional dialects (L10 and high-contact Ll varieties (Llc), while in the P/C > group we nominally distinguish between pidgins (P) and creoles (C) (but see the synopsesby Siegel and AgnesSchneider, both in this volume, for discussionsof the relevanceof this distinction). Brief definitions for each type are provided below and more detailed definitions can be found in the electronic version of WAVE q (Kortmann and Lunkenheimer2011). F Low-contacttraditional L1 dialects(LIt) d Traditional, regional non-standard mother-tonguevarieties, e.g. and the dialects FK spokenin the Southwest,the Southeastand the North of England in the British Isles and , xe and OzarkEnglish in North America. ;-;- High-contactLt varieties(Ltc) E6 This includes (e.g. EZ transplanted Ll Englishesand colonial standards , lu) English) as well as varieties (e.g. Irish English) and standard varieties (e.g. colloquial v. . ..E , colloquial ). ,EE 9O ..1 ^ 12varieties(L2) VE-.; ;;= Indigenized non-native varieties that have a certain degree of prestige and normative status in their .b>€o political communities, like , JamaicanEnglish, English, GhanaianEnglish EF and , but also non-native varieties that competewith local L1 varieties for prestigeand 3 ai normative status, e.g. ChicanoEnglish and Black . Pidgins (P) English-basedcontact languagesthat developedfor communication between two groups who did not share the same language, typically in restricted domains of use (especiallytrade). With the exception of Butler English, all the English-basedpidgins in WAVE (e.9. Tok Pisin, Nigerian Pidgin and Gha- 4 - BerndKortmann and Kerstin Lunkenheimer

naian Pidgin) can be consideredexpanded pidgins, i.e. in contrast to prototypical pidgins they are less restrictedin terms of domains of use, and many of them are spoken as native or primary languagesby a considerableproportion of their speakers. Creoles(C) English-basedcontact languagesthat developedin settings where a non-English-speakinggroup was under strong pressrue to acquire and use some form of English, while accessto its Ll speakerswas severelylimited (e.9.in plantation settings).Many creoleshave become the native languageof the major- ity of the population. Examplesof English-basedcreoles in the WAVEset include JamaicanCreole, Beli- zeanCreole, Sranan and TorresStrait Creole.

Sinceit is something that will be central in the three typological profiles on L1varieties, indigenized L2var- ieties, and pidgin and creolelanguages as well as in the GlobalSynopsis at the end of this volume, the follow- ing is crucial to note: All WAVEinforrnants were askedto classify'their' varietiesin termsof thesedefinitions, and although this was by no meanseasy for somevarieties, the typological categorizationsin Table 1 repre- sent what the tndlvtdual inforrnants ( !) said they were most comfortablewith (and had the opportunity to qualify in their chaptersin the presentvolume). In other words, the classificationsof the 74WAVE varieties in Table1 abovewere not imposedby the WAVEeditors, but madeby the WAVEspecialists for the individual var- ieties themselves.It is also important to note that the distinctions into three broad (Ll, L2, Pidgin/Creole) and five narrow variety types (high-contactLl, low-contactLl, L2, Pidgin, Creole)are a prioi categorizations basedon socio-historicalcriteria (which may be more or less debatablein the individual case).The point is that these categorizationsare the most widespreadones in sociolinguistic, variationist, creolist, etc. publi- u cations on varieties of English and .Basically, they are of little importance for the present undertaking of identifuing the structural profiles of varieties in the Anglophone world (and possibly larger groups thereof). Yet it was one of the expressaims of the WAVEproiect to test the extent to which thesedis- tinctions (asopposed to, or possibly in tandemwith, geography,i.e. the different Anglophoneworld regions) are reflectedin the morphosyntacticsimilarities and differencesbetween the varieties(see especially the Glo- bal Slmopsisby Kortrnann and Wolk, this volume). And indeed it will be one important finding that the clas- sification of a given variety on purely structural (i.e. morphosyntactic) grounds may clash with a classifi- cation on the basis of socio-historical(to someextent societally sanctioned,politically driven) grounds. For example,a given variety may well pattern with, i.e. exhibit the sameoverall morphosyntacticprofile as Eng- lish-basedpidgins even though it was classifiedby the relevant WAVEinformant as a (high-contact)Ll var- o iety. Or there may be a variety classified as an indigenized L2 variety which, f however,tums out to have an overall typological profile characteristicof L1varieties. This could well be the caseof a so-calledshift variety

N which, at least in its morphosyntax, seemsto have lost many properties characteristicof L2 Englishesand FK acquired a significant number of propertiestypical rather of mother-tonguevarieties of English.

.N xv i- :6 2.2 TheWAVE feature catalogue E6 EZ AA Designedas an extension and further developmentof Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi's(2O04) 76-feature cata- v- 'gs...8 logue, the WAVEfeature cataloguewas compiled drawing on overviewsof morphosyntacticvariation in Eng- lish, (20o4), o- such as the synopsis chapters in Kortmann, Schneider et al. or publications like Schneider vtr ..9 (2OO7),Mesthrie and Bhatt (2oo8), Melchersand Shaw (2003),and Hickey (2OO4),as well as descriptionsof q= 'aj1 individual varieties, pidgins and creoles.Thus, the vast majority of the featuresin the WAVEcatalogue are featuresthat are not unique to any one variety, and are widely discussedin the literature on morphoslmtac- J} 3 al tic variation in English.Obviously, an almost infinite number of lesswidespread features had to be excluded, 6x and it is a matter of discussionwhether the definitions and descriptionswe provided for the featuresare al- ways ideal. However,the cataloguehad to be kept at a format and size that could easily be convertedinto a questionnaireto be filled in by the contributors. In its final form, the catalogueincludes 235features from 12 different domains of grammar,as shown in Table2. lntroduction- 5

Grammaticaldomalnl Features(number) Sumfeatures in group 96of total features

Pronouns 7- 47 47 20,o"/" NounPhrase 48- 87 40 77.O"/" Tenseand aspect 88-120 33 14.Oo/o Modalverbs 727-757 7 3.O% Verb morphology 728-753 26 77.OVo Negation 754-769 76 6.87" Agreement 170-784 t5 6.4% Relativization 745-799 15 6.4"/" Complementation 200-270 11 4.7% Adverbial Subordination 277-275 5 2.7"/o Adverbs and Prepositions 276-222 7 3.O"/" Discourseorganization and word order 223-235 73 5.5"/"

1 Inthe originalfeature catalogue we had13 domains of grammar,with domain Vl "VerbPhrase lV: voice" consisting of a single feature,namely F153 (give passive: NP1 (patient) + gr've + NP2(agent) + V).This we remedied in Tabte2 above,including F153 in the 'Verb domain Phraselll: verbmorphology". The original domain numbering (l-Xlll) is stillfound, however, in theAppendices of the 55chapters on the individualvarieties in the presentvolume.

Table2: Domainsof grammarcovered in WAVE

The WAVE catalogue expands on Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi (2004) by including more features (particularly u such that are characteristic of pidgins and creoles or of indigenized L2 varieties), and by adapting features r! that had been included already, but had been found to be too all-encompassing to be of much use. For in- stance, feature [2t] in Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi (2OO4),wider range of uses of the progessive, is split into two features in WAVE: F88 (extension of.be Y -ing to stative verbs) and F89 (extension of progressive be V -ing to habitual situations).

E 2.3 Thesuruey o E o Once the feature cataloguehad been compiled, it was sent out as a questionnaireto more than 8Oscholars o known for their expertiseon varieties of English, who were askedto provide their iudgment of the presence F 'their' ..i and frequencyof each of the WAVEfeatures in variety. The questionnairewith the 235WAVE features d consistedof a spreadsheet,providing the feature descriptionsand one or two pertinent examplesfor each. sK The ratings had to be inserted by choosingfrom one ofsix categories: E5 .d A featureispervasiveorobligatory =v 'x6i- B feature is neither pervasivenor extremelyrare iR C feature exists,but is extremelvrare Ez D attestedabsence AA v- X not applicable -.5 ? no information available q- vtr..; Respondentswere invited to provide authentic examples and comments for each feature in an additional qR F= field. Guidelines for filling in the questionnaire included the request to restrict responsesto features of €b spoken languageand, for pidgins and creoles,to mesolectalvarieties. During the processof data collection, g-> more specific guidelines had to be provided for individual features,to ensureas much consistencyas poss- ?e -o ible in how problemswere handled acrossvarieties. For instance,the featuresrelating to multifunctional pro- noun forms (F18-F27)and those relating to verbal inflections (especiallyF128-F131) proved to be particularly troublesomefor respondentsworking on pidgins and creoles. 6 - Bernd Kortmannand Kerstin Lunkenheimer

2.4 Thefeature ratings: caveats and research potential

Despite our guidelines and clarifying everything related to the WAVE questionnaire, some variation remains in how featureswere interpreted by contributors, how A, B and Cratings were assignedto features not categorically present or absent in a variety, and in whether certain features were considered to be ap- plicable at all in a given variety. With regard to pidgins and creolesand L2varieties, individual contributors also made different choicesin whether or not to include features that are found only or mostly in the acro- lect or basilect (for P/Cs),or only in low-proficiency speakers(for L2 varieties). A further caveatrelates to the fact that in many cases,the ratings provided are impressionistic judgments by the experts, based on their own data and their (specialist and often native-speaker)knowledge of the variety. Only in somecases were larger corpora available to back up theseiudgments, and even then it was not possible to operational- ize all the WAVEfeatures for a corpus search.Thus it has to be said that the ratings (which can be found for all attestedfeatures in the appendicesto each chapter for the varieties representedin this volume) have to be taken with a pinch of salt. What looks categoricalcan hardly be more than an abstraction of and a rough approximation to linguistic and social reality. Each of the varieties, pidgins and creoles included in the WAVEdataset is itself subject to (socially and pragmatically meaningful) internal variation so that the pro- file emerging from the WAVEquestionnaire for a given variety is unlikely to perfectly match the linguistic behaviour of any particular subgroup of speakersof that variety (e.g. different age groups), let alone the linguistic behaviour of any particular speaker.This applies especially to very large, internally highly het- erogeneousspeech communities which have been subsumed under one variety (e.9. '' or 'Colloquial American English'), but at least as much to the L2 varieties and English-basedpidgins and @ creolesin the WAVEdatabase. Typically, they have ethnically and socially diverse speechcommunities, so that features attestedin WAVEmay not be present in somespeakers, or may be presentwith a different fre- quency, depending on which other languagesthey speak, and whether they are mesolectal, acrolectal or basilectal speakers.All of these, however, are notorious and inevitable problems shared by all large-scale typological surveys,such as WALS,APiCS, and this one. d At the sametime, there is a lot to be gained by adopting a survey approach(cf. also Anderwald and Kort- mann in press).Behind each of these caveats,there is an enonnous researchpotential, pointing to the fact that the WAVEdatabase and what is presentedin this atlas is at least as much a starting-point for new re- searchas it is the outcome of prior research.For example,for anyone working within variationist socioling- z uistics or within the emergingfield of variationist pragrnatics(especially the pragmaticsof grammar)it will be fascinating to zoom in on the individual data points of the WAVEfeature set. Especiallypromising in this F respectare all the featuresrated B or C sincethey are the prime candidatesfor glossingover 'orderly heteroge- N neity'. Moreover,the C features,in particular, have interesting stories to tell about languagechange in the FK past and the present.On a more generallevel, large-scaletypological comparisonshold a lot of potential for E5 gaining new insights generalizations put plainly, .N and making new on a more abstractlevel and, for seeingthe xv woods iF for the trees.This does not only hold for the narrower confines of the study of World Englishesand ;o English dialect grammar,but also for the interfacesbetween these two fields of linguistic study and creolistics E6 EZ and SLA research,on the one hand, and languagetypology, on the other hand (cf. for example the (overall 2u) spirit of the) contributions in Kortmann 2OO4and Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi2012). ta- . ..E EEE- VE

9A '62 €b J' oa fntroduction- 7

3 Structureand content of the Atlas

3.1 Organizationof the volumeand the individualchapters

The overall structure is very simple: as to be expectedin an atlas, the bulk of the chapters(55 out of 65)is or- ganizedregionally according to the Anglophone regions coveredby the WAVEdataset.t Much as we would haveloved to seechapters on all 74WAVE varieties in this volume, not all WAVEinformants sawthemselves in the position to contribute a chapterwithin the time window allotted. Someof them who had alreadyauthored 'their' a chapter on variety in the Handbook of Varietiesof English(Kortnann , Schneider et al. 2OO4)found that chapter still fully sufficient, with too little to add from the WAVEperspective to be worth writing a whole new chapter.For someof thesevarieties substitute authors were found, but eventuallywe endedup with descrip- tions of 55of the WAVEvarieties. There is full coverageof the Caribbean/SouthAmerica (13 out of 13WAVEvar- ieties; Part III) and Africa (15out of 16WAVE varieties; Part IV) and near-completecoverage for the British Isles (9 out of 11WAVE varieties; Part I) and South/SoutheastAsia (6 out of 7 WAVEvarieties; Part V). Underrepre- sentedare the two world regionsAustralia/Pacific (5 out of 13WAVE varieties; Part VI) and North America (4 out of 10 WAVEvarieties; Part II) as well as the SouthA0antic (1 out of 3 WAVEvarieties; this variety,Falkland Island English,and MalteseEnglish as the only Europeanvariety of English outsidethe British Isleshave been groupedtogether as isolates in PartVII). In termsof the threebroad variety typesdistinguished in WAVE,the 55 chaptersin PartsI-V[ cover 19Ll varieties,16 L2 varieties,and 2OPidgins and Creoles. There is a lot of individuality in these descriptive chapters. The vast majority of them is concemed with the relevant variety alone; in exceptional cases,a given variety was systematically compared with other WAVEvar- o ieties (cf. Malcolm'schapter on Aboriginal English,where this high-contactL1 variety is discussedwith E1 regard to morphosTntactic features shared or unshared with Roper River Creole and Torres Stait Creole, on the one hand, € and with lrish Englishand the dialectsof SoutheastEngland, on the other hand) or with the mostimport- ant indigenous languagesin the relevant part of the world (e.9. Faraclasin his chapter on Nigerian Pidgin). The authors were not committed to following a set structure, apart from the fact that they were asked to include a sectionon socio-culturalandsociolinguistic background(shortif the givenvarietywasalreadypartof theHand- book of Vaieties of English(Kortrnann, Schneider et al. 2OO4),longer otherwise). Moreover, the focus of their E chapter was clearly to be on the most notable aspects conceming their variety from the WAVEperspective. Which WAVEfeatures or feature sets,however, they put at the centre of their chapter was entirely left to the in- o dividual authors. They were also encoutaged to highlight potential problems of the WAVEdataset and overall approach, and to point out properties and F crucial aspects of the relevant variety which the WAVEfeature set di fails to capture or may even distort. Thus the first 55 chapters in this book also contribute to a critical debate

N of the WAVEmethod and enterprise as a whole. Each of these chapters ends with an appendix which lists all FK attested WAVEfeatures with their (A, B or C) ratings and, in most cases,authentic examples for the individual =^ features. ^N Following the chapterson individual varietiesis a set of altogetherten chapterswhose main function is :6 to developthe larger picture and to pool information on the varieties(i) in the individual world regions(these =Eb\ '. EZ are the six regional profiles in Part VIII) and (ii) belonging to the three different major variety types (cf. the ^a three typological profiles on Ll, L2 and Pidgin/Creolevarieties in Part IX). It is in these chapters that the :z^ ...E tr- readerwill, for example,learn about the most distinctive and diagnosticfeatures and feature clustersfor the individual world (sometimes (so-called q^ regions called areoversals)and variety types van'oversals;cf. Szmre- XF csanyi and Kortmann 2OO9),about featuresnotably rare or even absentin the varietiesdiscussed, and about .;>E6 geographicaland/or substratesignals within the individual world regions.Three points are particularly im- rhg"}, ?(, 6A 1 Thus this atlas is not organizedtike WALS,i.e. with chapters basis of the Handbook ofVarieties of English (Kortmann et al. for each of the individuat features and each chaptertaking a 2004, vol. 2). Fortwo grammar domains, negation and tense & comparative[ook at the observablevariation. Essentially(only aspect,the WAVEdataset has also recentlybeen used in com- for entire domains of grammar rather than individual features) parative surveychapters exploring in particular areal patterns this is the methodthat Siemund(2013) uses for morpho- in the Anglophoneworld (seeAnderwald 2072 fot negation, syntacticvariation in the Anglophoneworld, largely on the Lunkenheimer2012 for tense & aspect). BerndKortmann and Kerstin Lunkenheimer

portant about theseperspectivizing synopses. First of all, they are basedon the entire WAVEdata set, i.e. not only on the 55varieties covered in the individual chapters,but on the ratings of the attestedmorphosyntactic featuresin all 74varieties. Secondly, it is in thesechapters that all the eWAVE-basedrnaps will be found (see also section3.2 below). The authorsselected from the thousandsof mapsthat can easilybe producedwith the help of eWAVEthose that are the most telling and capableof visualizing the most distinctive featuresor fea- ture constellationsin the individual regional or typological subsetsofvarieties - and occasionallydesigned maps eWAVEcannot produce.Thirdly, all authors of the slmoptic chapterswere provided with phenetic net- 'splits-tree' work diagrams of the type produced with the help of the NeighborNetalgorithm, a powerful method for large-scalecluster analysesthat has found its way from bioinformatics to linguistics, especiallyto dialectology,dialectometry, and quantitative languagetypology, in the courseof the last fewyears (cf. e.g.the contributions in the volume by Szmrecsanyiand Wiilchli (2012);for a descriptionof the algorithm and the rea- soning behind it seeKortmann and Wolk, section4.1, this volume). Thesenetwork diagramsare ideally suited for setting in relation to each other the overall structural (more exactly,morphoslmtactic) profiles of all the varieties in the different subsets(i.e. in a given Anglophone world region or belonging to the samevariety type). It cannot be stressedenough that thesephenograms are purely designedto capturestructural ( !) simi- larities and dissimilarities among the membersof the relevant set of varieties considered.That is, for every single pair of varietiesin this subset,it is determinedwith regard to how many featuresthey agree,which in turn is measuredin terms of the number of featureswhich are co-present(i.e. have receivedan A, B or C rat- ing) or co-absent(i.e. havereceived a D, X, or ? rating) in both varieties.This is the most consistentand neutral way of determining structural (or: typological) (dis)similarity acrosslanguages or varieties- and the statisti- cally most reliable one, too: the phenogramspresented in this volume accountfor more than 99% of the ob- u sewablevariance. In each of the chaptersin PartsVIII and IX one phenetic network will be discussedwhich F] has been solely producedfor the relevant subsetof varieties.In addition, eachchapter will also comment on the distribution of the membersof the relevantsubset of varietiesin the overall world network diagram for all 74 WAVEvarieties. This is Network WAVE-alland can be found in the foldout at the end of this volume. (The readermay note that there are two further foldouts in this atlas. On the one hand, the world map with all 74 WAVEvarieties and, on the other hand, the entire WAVEfeature set consisting of 235features, numbered Fl to F235.)This world network diagram will take centre stagein the Global Slmopsisby Kortmann and Wolk, which will conclude this atlas. In this chapter they will take yet another step back and ffy to identifii the largestpossible picture of morphoslmtacticvariation in the Anglophoneworld, addressingamong others the following questions:What are vemacular angloversals,i.e. thosewith the widest spread?What arerara and, rarissimain the grammars of the varieties of English around the world? Which varieties attest the largest, which ones the lowest feature totals?What can we say about the explanatory power of geographyvs. variety d or language type as the major factor accounting for morphosyntactic variation? How do C-rated features FK (i.e. those that are extremelyrare in the relevant variety) influence the overall morphosyntactictype of that Eo variety? .N :v i- Xi =gb\ .- 3.2 Maps E= \a) V; dF Thereis a total of 96 maps in PartsVIII and IX of this atlas. As noted above,they representa selectionof the most informative maps produced going q- that can be in eWAVE,complemented by additional maps beyond |zF what eWAVEcan do. Overviewmaps at the beginning of eachof the regional and typological profile chapters g6 .H> help locate the varieties under discussion,while feature maps illustrate the distribution of selectedWAVE features.The vast majority of these feature maps plotting q: are eWAVE-stylemaps the occurrenceof one fea- z? ture in a set of varieties.As in eWAVE,red color is used to indicate varietiesin which the featurewas rated A, -v orangefor B ratings, yellow for C ratings, and grey for varietiesin which the featurereceived an 'absence'rat- ing (i.e. D, X or ?). Other featuremaps illustrate the distribution of severalfeatures simultaneously, and a few show the distribution of a whole set of features- something that can not be done with eWAVE.For practical reasons,the A-B-Cdistinction had to be abandonedin favour ofa binary'presence'vs. 'absence'distinction in thesecombined feature maps. lntroduction- 9

Thus, the maps visualize information presentedin the text of the profile chaptersin Parts VIII and IX, and they complement and enhance eWAVEby picking out the cherriesfrom the cake of the thousands of individual featuremaps that could be produced,and by providing the additional option of combinedmaps for largerfeature sets. A list of all maps,and the featuresfor which mapsexist, is providedin the lisf o/Maps in the ftont matter. We strongly encouragethe readerto consult this list when reading the synopsischapters, since for a featurefor which there is no map in one chaptera map is very likely to exist in one of the other chapters.

Acknowledgements

There are many enthusiastic people and highly supportive institutions, to some extent also lucky coinci- dences,the WAVEproject as a whole (eWAW and the present volume) would have been impossible with- out. To start with, the two editors gratefully acknowledgethe support of the Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies(FRIAS) in the design and data collection phaseof the project. Bemd Kortmann enioyed an Internal SeniorFellowship at the FRIASfrom April 2oo8 until September 2OO9and Kerstin Lunkenheimerioined him there as a researchassistant from September2OO8 until March 2009.Moreover, several ofthe consultantsand authors enioyedresearch fellowships and short-termvisits at the FRIAS. Especiallyin the designphase of the project,but also at variousimportant stageson the way,it was invalu- able to have colleaguesand friends we could turn to for their professionaladvice and feedbackon our design of the WAVEquestionnaire and on crucial questionswhich aroseduring the long processof data collection u and revision.Among thesethe following figured prominently: LieselotteAnderwald, DagmarDeuber, Magnus Huber,Susanne Michaelis, Peter Miihlhdusler, JeffSiegel, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, and SusanneWagner. Kerstinand Bemd arealso most indebtedto the Max PlanckInstitute for EvolutionaryAnthropology (Leip- E zig) for much helpful adviceand for letting us piggybackon their databaseprojects with the electonic version of WAVE.More specifically,our thanks go to Martin Haspelmathand, once again, SusanneMichaelis. It was d solely due to their support that the MPI allowed their two specialistsfor programming typological databases and overseeingsuch ambitious electronicatlas projectsas WALSand APiCSto spend a significant amount of time on WAVE.The two programming wizards of the MPI to whom we (like, I trust, the entire researchcom- munity) will = not tire to bow in admiration are Hagen|ung for all his brilliant ideas in the eWAVEdesign and Hans-JtirgBibiko in the final stagesof eWAVEand the production stageof the presentvolume. Taking as input the updated WAVEdatabase in the summerof 2O12,it was Hans-fiirg(of WALSfame) who also signedrespon- F sible for producing all of the maps for the presentatlas. You are truly the Lord of the Maps,Hans-f 0rg!

N Furthermore,De Gruyter Mouton (Anke Beck, Birgit Sievertand later Uri Tadmor)are to be thanked for FK their continuous support of the WAVEproiect and for their untiring enthusiasmin planning the print publi- =^ cation with us from the cover design to the smallestdetail of this atlas. Especiallythe people in chargeof the .N production (WolfgangKonwitschny, Angelika i- Hermann and Julie Miess)are to be thanked for their helpful- ;o .r ness,patience and generosityconceming the extensionof deadlinesat the various production stages,and for E6 EZ always trying to make the impossible possible. It's hard to imagine a different publisher this volume could AA have been published with! A publication proiect of this dimension requiresmutual trust built up over many v..-_= years E+ of fruitful and successfulcooperation. But before somethingcan go in production, it takesan enonnous amount work goes produc- al- of that into vc ing a manuscript ready for submission.All of the following researchand student assistantshelped the edi- qa '62 tors at various stagesof the proiect: AgnesSchneider, Verena Schr0ter, Marten Juskan,Thilo Weber,Smaran *b Dayal, Verena Haser,Lina Wallraff, g-b and Imke Deger.Ultimately, however, it was, as usual with all publi- cations authored or edited by Bemd Kortmann, Melitta Cocan- best secretaryand office managerin the (at leastGerman academic) world - who prepareda manuscriptin mint condition and who, in closeconsultation with the authors and the publishers,solved many major and minor problemson the way towards submission (and even after that during the proofstage). After all thesewords of thanks, there is, however,still one more group of people whom the editors wish to thank most profusely.All of them are the true heroesbehind the WAVEproject, in general,and the present BerndKortmann and Kerstin Lunkenheimer

atlas, in particular, namely the more than 8Owonderfully meticulous and patient colleagueswho servedas informants for WAVE,62 of whom also contributed a chapter(some even two or three) to this volume. Without their readinessto devotea significant amount of their precioustime to filling in the WAVEquestionnaire, pro- viding e*amples and answeringour questions(in severalrounds due to our daring - and predictably vain - attempt at perfection),this atlas proiect would have been impossible,impossible even to conceiveof. Heart- felt thanks and deepgratitude to all of the following: LieselotteAnderwald (English dialectsin the Southeast of England), Umberto Ansaldo (Colloquial SingaporeEnglish), Angela Bartens(San Andr6s Creole),Robert Bayley (), Korah Belgrave(Barbadian Creole),Carolin Biewer ( English), Lisa Bonnici (MalteseEnglish), SeanBowerman (White South African English), David Britain (Falkland Island English), Alfred Buregeya(Kenyan English), Sandra Clarke (Newfoundland English), Peter Collins (Australian Eng- lish), Stacy Denny (Barbadian Creole, or: Bajan), Dagmar Deuber (Trinidadian Creole), Hubert Devonish (GuyaneseCreole), Sabine Ehrhart (PalmerstonEnglish), Michael Ellis (Ozark English), GenevidveEscure (Belizean Creole), Nicholas Faraclas(Nigerian Pidgin), Markku Filppula (Irish English), Malcolm Finney (Krio, or: Creole),Susan Fitzmaurice (White ), Ashley Greig (), Stephanie Hackert (),Rachel Hendery (Palmerston English), Michaela Hilbert (MalteseEnglish), Priya Hosali (Butler English), Magnus Huber (GhanaianEnglish, GhanaianPidgin), Mar- ianne Hundt (Acrolectal Fiji English), Alexander Kautzsch(Earlier African American Vernacular English), Jennifer Kewley Draskau (), Manfred Itug (MalteseEnglish), Lisa Lim (Colloquial English), Ahmar Mahboob (Pakistani English), Ian Malcolm (Aboriginal English, RoperRiver Creole(Iftiol), TorresStrait Creole),Gunnel Melchers(Orkney and ShetlandEnglish), RajendMesthrie (Black South African English, Indian South African English), Miriam Meyerhoff (Bislama),Michael Meyler (), u Bettina Migge(Eastem Maroon Creole), Michael Montgomery (Appalachian English), Salikoko Mufwene (Gul- lah), Peter Miihlhdusler (Norf'k, or: /Pitcaim English), Peter Patrick (famaican Creole),An- drew Pawley (Australian Vernacular English), Robert Penhallurick (), Pam Peters(), StefaniePillai (MalaysianEnglish), Paula Frescod(Vincentian Creole),Heidi Quinn (), feffrey Reaser(Bahamian English), Anna Rosen(Channel Island English), Kent Sakoda(Hawai'i Creole),Andrea Sand (famaican English), fosef Schmied (TanzanianEnglish), Daniel Schreier (St. Helena English, Tristan da CunhaEnglish), Anne Schrtider( Pidgin), Mark Sebba(British Creole),Devyani Sharma (Indian English), Jeff Siegel (Hawai'i Creole),Augustin Simo Bobda (CameroonEnglish), Beth Lee Simon (Colloquial American English), |ohn Singler (Liberian Settler English, Vemacular ), GeoffSmith (Tok Pisin), JenniferSmith (ScottishEnglish), JudeSsempuuma (), Andrea Sud- o bury (Falkland Island English), Rotimi Taiwo (), lan Tent (Colloquial Fiii English), Dahlia F Thompson (GuyaneseCreole), Beniamin Torbert (Bahamian English), GraemeTrousdale (English dialects q in the North of England), Peter Trudgill (East Anglian English), Tonies Veenstra (Saramaccan),Susanne FK Wagner(English dialects in the Southwestof England), Donald Winford (Sranan),Walt Wolfram (Southeast =^ American enclavedialects, Urban African AmericanVernacular English, Rural African AmericanVernacular rN English), May L-YWong (),Valerie Youssef (Trinidadian (Acrolectal iF Creole),Lena Zipp Fiji Xo 6r English) E6 EZ Specialmention among our authors deserveall those who contributed more than one chapter: Stefanie AA Hackert, Magnus Huber, Raj Mesthrie, Jeff Siegel,fohn Singler, and SusanneWagner. David Britain would !Z: have this exclusiveclub, too, had he not been preventedby sudden severehealth problemsfrom auth- .EE ioined :o oring the regional profile on the British Isles,which he had agreedto write on top of his chapter 0)- co-authored vtr .-9 on Falkland Island English.We would also like to say a specialword of thanks to VerenaSchriiter for writing E: '64 the chapter on Colloquial SingaporeEnglish on such short notice (and for submitting a perfect'editors'de- light'version just in time to give birth to little Mira Margarita). €"r, It is in the name of all of those many people who have worked hard and with a lot of enthusiasmon the WAVEproject that the editors expresstheir sincere hope that the present volume (ideally in tandem with eWAVE)will be perceivedand appreciatedas the powerful researchand teaching resourcefor the presentas well as future generationsofresearchers, graduate and undergraduatestudents that it was designedto be. May it serveboth as a work of referenceand a point of departure to innovative researchin the study of vari- ation of English around the world! Introduction- 11

References

Andenivald,Lieselotte. 2012. Negation in varieties of English.In: Melchers,Gunnel, and Phitip Shaw. 2OO3.World Englishes. RaymondHickey (ed.), Areal Feotures of theAnglophone London:Arnold. World,299-32a.Berlin/New York: de Gruyter Mouton. Mesthrie,Ralend, and Rakesh M. Bhatt.2008.World Eng- Anderwatd,Lieselotte, and Bernd Kortmann. in press.Typologi- Iishes.The Study of NewSociolinguistic Varieties, Cam- calmethods in dialectology.In: Manfred Krug, and Julia bridge:Cambridge University Press. Schl0ter(eds.), Reseorch Methods in LanguageVafiotion Michaelis,Susanne, Philippe Maurer, Martin Haspelmath, ondChange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. andMagnus Huber (eds.) to appear2013. The Atlas of Dryer,Matthew S., and Martin Haspelmath (eds.) 2011. Ihe Pidginand CreoleLanguage Strucfures (APiCS). Munich: WorldAtlas of LanguageStructures Online. Munich: Max MaxPlanck Digital Library. Information available at PlanckDigitat Library. Available online at http://tingweb.eva.mpg.de/apics/index.ph p/ http://wals.info/. About_APiCS Haspelmath,Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Schneider,Edgar W. 2OO7.Postcolonial English. Varieties Comrie(eds.) 2OO5. The World Atlas of LonguogeStruc- Aroundthe World.Cambridge: Cambridge University fures.Oxford: Oxford University Press. Press. Hickey,Raymond (ed.) 2004. Legacies of ColonialEnglish. Schreier,Daniel, Peter Trudgitt, Edgar W. Schneider, and Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. JeffreyP. Williams (eds.) 2011. The Lesser-known Varieties Hickey,Raymond (ed,) 2012. Areal Features of theAnglophone of English:An lntroduction,Cambridge: Cambridge Uni. Wodd.Berlin/New York: de GruyterMouton. versityPress. Kortmann,Bernd, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2004. Global Szmrecsanyi,Benedikt. in press.Analyzing aggregated lin- synopsis:Morphological and syntactic variation in Eng- guisticdata. In: Manfred Krug, and lulia SchlUter(eds.), lish.In: Bernd Kortmann, Edgar Schneider, Kate Burridge, ReseorchMethods in LanguageVoriation and Change. RaiendMesthrie, and Clive Upton (eds.),The Handbookof Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

@ Varietiesof English.Yol.2zMorphology and Syntax, Szmrecsanyi,Benedikt, and Bernd Kortmann. 2009. Vernacu- sl 7742-7202.Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. laruniversals and angloversals in a typologicalperspec- Kortmann,Bernd (ed.) 2OO4. Didlectology Meets Typologyt tive.ln: Markku Filpputa, luhani Klemola, and Heli DialectGrummar from a Cross-linguisticPerspective, Ber- Paulasto(eds,), Vernaculor llniversals and Longuage lin/NewYork:Mouton de Gruyter. Contocts:Evidence ftom Varietiesof Englishand Beyond, Kortmann,Bernd, and Kerstin Lunkenheimer (eds.) 2O77. The 33-53.London/New York: Routledge. ElectronicWorldAtlas of Varietiesin English[eWAVE]. Szmrecsanyi,Benedikt, and Bernhard Walchti (eds.) in press. Leipzig:Max Ptanck Institute for EvolutionaryAnthropol- LinguisticVariation in Textand Speech, within and across ogy.http: //www,ewave-atlas.org/ .Berlin: de Gruyter. F Kortmann,Bernd, Edgar Schneider, Clive Upton, Rajend Siemund,Peter. 2013. Varieties of English:A Typological Mesthrie,and Kate Burridge (eds.) 2004. A Handbookof Approach.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Varietiesof English.A Multinedia ReferenceTool.2 vol- Trudgilt,Peter. 2009. Sociolinguistic typology and complexifi- umesand CD-ROM. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. cation.In: Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil, and PeterTrudgill F Kortmann,Bernd, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.) 2012. trn- (eds.),Language Complexity as an EvolvingVariable, guistic ComplexiU:Second Languoge Acquisition, lndi- 98-109.Oxford: Oxford University Press. d genizotion,Contact. Berlin: de Gruyter. Trudgilt,Peter. 2011. Soci oli n g u istic Typology:Soci al Determ i - FK Lunkenheimer,Kerstin. 2012. Tense and aspect. In: Raymond nantsof LinguisticComplexity. Oxford: Oxford University +6 Hickey(ed.), Areal Features of theAnglophone World, Press. ^N xv 329-353.Berlin/New York: de Gruyter Mouton. xo H@ =Ea^ -. ;z =a V.

trF eo Y'A 0)- 11 F 9l '61 qE =E 3 at Dlsclalmer: The editors would like to point out that in selectingand naming the varietiesof English and the ^x English-basedpidgins and creolesrepresented in this volume, in choosing abbreviations,identifying coun- tries, and locating varieties on the various maps, they have been guided exclusively by practical con- siderationsand current scholarly practice. In no caseshould our usagebe taken as representinga particular political stanceon our part or on the part ofthe publisher, or as insulting or disparagingthe speakersofany particular variety. u

d

o F

N FK E5 .N :v Xo .r E6 ;z zu) v- ;j.E 8.9 o- !ztr ..9 gd '64 th g-.