Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-01T03:34:30.973Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Young Children Creating Grammars: Are Twins’ Languages Like Pidgins or Creoles?

from Part II - The Acquisition of Syntax

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2025

By
Peter Bakker
Edited by
Dany Adone  and
Astrid Gabel
Dany Adone
Affiliation:
Universität zu Köln
Astrid Gabel
Affiliation:
Universität zu Köln
Get access

Summary

Bakker’s chapter discusses the syntactic development in twin grammars. Twins and other young children are sometimes reported to create their own languages, sometimes called autonomous languages. The grammars of these languages are quite rudimentary, and the lexicon is derived from the language(s) spoken around them. Bickerton claimed that Creoles share structural properties because the languages have been created by children. Bakker looks at the structures of documented autonomous languages and compares them with Creole languages. It appears that the autonomous languages have more in common with pidgins than with Creole languages, structurally, even though they are created by children, like Creole languages. The twin situation influences the rudimentary properties of the autonomous languages.

Keywords

autonomous/twin languagesPidgins & Creoleslanguage creationLanguage Bioprogrampragmaprogram
Type
Chapter
Information
The Evolution, Acquisition and Development of Syntax
Insights from Creole Languages and Beyond
 , pp. 170 - 190
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aboh, Enoch O., Veenstra, Tonjes & Smith, Norval S. H.. (2013). Saramaccan structure dataset. In Michaelis, Susanne Maria, Maurer, Philippe, Haspelmath, Martin & Huber, Magnus (eds.), Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://apics-online.info/contributions/3.Google Scholar
Baker, Philip. (1972). Kreol: A Description of Mauritian Creole. London: Hurst.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter. (1987a). Autonomous Languages: Signed and Spoken Languages Created by Children in the Light of Bickerton’s Bioprogram Hypothesis. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter (1987b). Autonomous languages of twins. Acta Genetica Medicae et Gemellologiae/Twin Research, 36, 233–38.Google ScholarPubMed
Bakker, Peter (1990). The structure of autonomous languages: Natural or not? In Koch, W. A. (ed.), Natürlichkeit der Sprache und der Kultur. Acta Colloquii. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. Norbert Brockmeyer, pp. 74–95.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter (2008). The development of tense, mood and aspect in creole languages and the typology of affix order. In Josephson, F. & Söhrman, I. (eds.), Interdependence of Diachronic and Synchronic Analyses, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, Peter, Aymeric Daval, Markussen, Parkvall, Mikael & Plag, Ingo. (2011). Creoles are typologically distinct from noncreoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 26(1), 5–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, Peter, Borchsenius, Finn, Levisen, Carsten & Sippola, Eeva (eds.). (2017). Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, P. & Daval-Markussen, A. (2017). Creole typology I: Comparative overview of creole languages. In Bakker, Peter, Borchsenius, Finn, Levisen, Carsten & Sippola, Eeva (eds.), Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartelt, Guillermo. (1989). Review of Bakker 1987a. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 358–59.Google Scholar
Baxter, Alan N. (1988). A Grammar of Kristang (Malacca Creole Portuguese). Pacific Linguistics Series B – No. 95. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. (1974). Creolization, linguistic universals and the brain. Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Hawaii 6(3), 125–41. [See also Bickerton 1980]Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1977). Pidginization and creolization: Language acquisition and language universals. In Valdman, A. (ed.), Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 49–69.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1979). Beginnings. In Hill, K. C. (ed.), The Genesis of Language. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1980). Creolization, linguistic universals, natural semantax and the brain. In Day, R. R. (ed.), Issues in English Creoles: Papers from the 1975 Hawaii Conference, [Varieties of English Around the World, G2]. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1981). Roots of Language. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1982). Learning without experience: The creole way. In Obler, L. K. & Menn, L. (eds.), Exceptional Language and Linguistics. London: Academic Press, pp. 15–29.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1983). Creole languages. Scientific American, 249(1), 108–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1984). The language bioprogram hypothesis. (+ open peer commentary). The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(2), 173–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1991). On the supposed ‘gradualness’ of creole development. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 6, 25–58. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.6.1.03bic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1992a). On the Thomason-Kaufman critique of the Bioprogram. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 7(1), 101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (1992b). The sociohistorical matrix of creolization. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 7(2), 307–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (2000). How protolanguage became language. In Knight, C., Studdert-Kennedy, M. & Hurford, J. R. (eds.), The Evolutionary Emergence of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 264–84.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (2004). Reconsidering Creole exceptionalism. Language 80(4), 828–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (2006). Language use, not language, is what develops in childhood and adolescence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29(3), 280–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X06239062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (2009). Bastard Tongues: A Trailblazing Linguist Finds Clues to Our Common Humanity in the World’s Lowliest Languages. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek (2014). More than Nature Needs. Language, Mind, and Evolution. Boston: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, Derek, Alexiadou, Artemis & Kiss, Tibor. (2015). Creole languages. In Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK) 42/3. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 1710–26.Google Scholar
Bishop, Dorothy & Bishop., Sonia (1998). ‘Twin language’: A risk factor for language impairment? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 41, 150–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L. (1985). Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Coelho, A. (1880–86). Os dialectos romanicos ou neo-latinos na Africa, Asia e America. Boletin do Sociedade de Geographia de Lisboa, 2, 129–196; 3, 451–478; 6, 705–55.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard (2000). From potential to realization: An episode in the origin of language. Linguistics, 38(5), 989–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culloty, Amy M., O’Toole, Ciara & Gibbon, Fiona E. (2019). Longitudinal study of expressive language and speech of twins at 3 and 5 years: Outgrowing a twinning effect. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 62(7), 2425–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Haeseleer, E., Geenens, E., Parmentier, S., Corthals, P. & Van Lierde, K.. (2016). Language development of three- to twelve-year-old twins compared to singletons. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 68, 92–98. https://doi.org/10.1159/000446701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, Philip S., von Stumm, Sophie, Selzam, Saskia & Hayiou-Thomas, Marianna E.. (2020). Does the inclusion of a genome-wide polygenic score improve early risk prediction for later language and literacy delay? Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 63(5), 1467–78. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00161CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daval-Markussen, Aymeric. (2013). First steps towards a typological profile of creoles. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 45(2): 274–95. 10.1080/03740463.2014.880606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goilo, E.R (2000). Papiamento Textbook. 11th ed. Oranjestad, Aruba: De Wit Stores N.V. [1st ed. 1962]Google Scholar
Haden, Ricole & Claire Penn, . (1985). The twin situation and its effects on syntax and interactional language over time. The British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 20(1), 19–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayashi, Chisato & Hayakawa, Kazuo. (2004). Factors affecting the appearance of ‘twin language’: An original language naturally developing within twin pairs. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 9, 103–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayashi, Chisato, Hayakawa, Kazuo, Tsuboi, Chika, Oda, Keiko, Amau, Yukiko, Kobayashi, Yoko & Kato, Kenji. (2006). Relationship between parents’ report rate of twin language and factors related to linguistic development: Older sibling, nonverbal play and preschool attendance. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9(1), 165–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayashi, Chisato, Mikami, Hiroshi, Nishihara, Reiko, Maeda, Chiho & Hayakawa, Kazuo. (2013). The relationship between twin language, twins’ close ties, and social competence. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 17(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.83CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. (2007). The Genesis of Grammar: A Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, R. W. (1946). The language development of a group of triplets. The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 69(2), 181–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856559.1946.10533387CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koah, Rhea Mariam & Sreedevi, N.. (2010). Speech and language characteristics of monozygotic twins: A case study. Language in India, 10(12), 154–66.Google Scholar
Page, Le, Robert., (1958). General outlines of Creole English dialects in the British Caribbean III: Comparison with other dialects. Orbis, 7(1), 54–64.Google Scholar
Lorch, Marjorie & Hellal, Paula. (2012). The ‘idioglossia’ cases of the 1890s and the clinical investigation and treatment of developmental language impairment. Cortex, 48(8), 1052–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manfredi, Stefano. (2017). Árabi júba: Un pidgin-créole du Soudan du Sud. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Mittler, Peter. (1970). Biological and social aspects of language development in twins. Developmental Medicine and Child Psychology, 12, 741–57.Google ScholarPubMed
Mogford-Bevan, Kay. (2000). Developmental language impairments with complex origins: Learning from twins and multiple birth children. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 52, 74–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muysken, Pieter & Smith, Norval. (1990). Question words in pidgin and creole languages. Linguistics, 28, 883–903. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1990.28.4.883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikael, Parkvall & Bakker, Peter. 2013. Pidgins. In Matras, Y. & Bakker, P. (eds.), Contact Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 15–64.Google Scholar
Rice, Mabel B., Zubrick, Stephen R., Taylor, Catherine L., Gayán, Javier & Bontempo, Daniel E.. (2014). Late language emergence in 24-month-old twins: Heritable and increased risk for late language emergence in twins. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 57, 917–28. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2013/12-0350).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, Ian (ed.). (2016). The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Sarah J. (2004). The emergence of Hawaii Creole English in the early twentieth century: The sociohistorical context of creole genesis. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Savić, Svenka. (1980). How Twins Learn to Talk: A Study of the Speech Development of Twins from 1 to 3. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sippola, Eeva. (2011). Una gramática descriptiva del chabacano de Ternate. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C. (1989). Evidence from exceptions: Sign language & bioprograms. Review article: Peter Bakker, Autonomous Languages, 1987. Sign Language Studies, 65, 339–48.Google Scholar
Sebastian, Swapna, Chengappa, Shyamala & Ballraj, Achamma. (2012). Language learning disability in identical twins. Language in India, 12(7), 580–84.Google Scholar
Taylor, Douglas. (1960). Language shift or changing relationship? International Journal of American Linguistics 26, 155–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Douglas (1971). Grammatical and lexical affinities of creoles. In Hymes, D. (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 293–96.Google Scholar
Thompson, R.W. (1961). A note on some possible affinities between the creole dialects of the Old World and those of the New. In Page, R. B. Le (ed.), Proceedings of the 1959 Conference on Creole Language Studies. London: Macmillan, pp. 107–13.Google Scholar
Thorpe, Karen. (2006). Twin children’s language development. Early Human Development, 82(6), 387–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2006.03.012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tommaso, Trombetta, Brustia, Piera, Curti, Lorenzo, Caldarera, Angela M., Gerino, Eva & Rollè, Luca. (2019). Twins’ and singletons’ linguistic environment: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02005Google Scholar
Velupillai, V. (2015). Pidgins, Creoles & Mixed Languages: An Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zazzo, René. (1960). Les Jumeaux, le couple et la personne. Vol. II: L’individuation psychologique. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×