This paper summarizes the discussion about the origin and the status of Afrikaans. Two schools appear to be opposed to each other: the philological school and a creolistic view. The philological school tried to demonstrate with meticulous research of sources that Afrikaans is a full daughter of 17th century Dutch, which set foot ashore with van Riebeeck in 1652 at the Cape of Good Hope. Linguists who thought of a pattern of creolization in the formation of Afrikaans point to the influence of the languages of slaves brought to South Africa and to the influence of the original inhabitants, the Khoi and the San. This contribution mainly outlines the ideological background of these two schools of thought. For the philological school this is the system of Apartheid, while for the Creolist view the emphasis is more on decolonization.
Morphological change is not a result of mechanical, predictable processes, but of the behavior of language users. Speakers reinterpret opaque data in order to assign a more transparent structure to them. Subsequently successful reinterpretation may form the basis of new derivations. The moment such a derivative word formation process becomes productive a language change has taken place. In addition, this paper shows how language change obscures the distinction between separate morphological processes such as compounding and derivation and thus between morphological categories. Moreover, the data under discussion show that there is not a preferred natural direction of language change. Most of the examples are taken from English and Dutch, but also a few French, Frisian, German and Afrikaans data are discussed.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.