2 ms·
Not from a linguistics perspective it isn't. You could make a convincing argument that it is (or was) a creole of sorts, but one of the distinguishing features
by stan_rogers 13y ago
Not from a linguistics perspective it isn't. You could make a convincing argument that it is (or was) a creole of sorts, but one of the distinguishing features of a pidgin is that it's an incomplete language in which circumlocution is always (not just occasionally) required to convey complex ideas. And if English were once (or twice or so) a creole (the Vikings did as much violence to Anglo-Saxon as the Normns did), it can hardly be called one anymore since it has become crufted and overgrown with unnecessary complexity.
- simonebrunozzi 13y agoExactly!
- Germanicus 13y ago>an incomplete language in which circumlocution is always (not just occasionally) required to convey complex ideas . . . crufted and overgrown . . . Not disagreeing, but incompleteness comes from the overgrowth sometimes. Interestingly, we now have to use all sorts of circumlocutions every time we need the now-lost thou/ye distinction, and routinely miss its significance when reading Early Modern English texts like Shakespeare or the King James Bible. So even people who are aware of the old distinctions need to use the modern circumlocutions to communicate clearly. Similarly, native speakers will need to conform to World English norms.