Gullah and Barbadian. Origins and Relationships

Abstract

GULLAH, with its offshoot Afro-Seminole (Hancock 1977), is the only English-derived creole to have survived within the continental United States. Of all the western-hemisphere anglo-creoles, Gullah is the least satisfactorily accounted for in its relationships both to other such languages and to the varieties of black vernacular English spoken in the United States, with which it is often linked (Hancock 1979). Too few treatments of the subject have acknowledged the importance of both the linguist and the historian in tracing the relationships of Gullah. The two disciplines are interdependent, a fact that Cassidy recognizes by indicating that much of his discussion is based on two new sources generally accessible before (Curtin 1969 and Wood 1974). I made use of Curtin when writing my doctoral thesis, which deals with the sources of Krio lexicon. Material in it certainly supports much of Cassidy's argument; Wood, on the other hand, contains arguments which appear not to be generally helpful from Cassidy's point of view. Early in his discussion, Cassidy suggests that I the existence of a Barbadian creole, since I have placed Gullah in direct line of descent from Krio (Hancock 1969, p. 26). I do indeed doubt the existence of an early, stabilized Barbadian creole and give my reasons below; I likewise continue to maintain that a Krio ancestor existed for Gullah, but I must clarify my interpretation of the term Krio. I have used it, perhaps overgenerally, to refer to an earlier part of the continuum that resulted in Krio. Here I use the designation Guinea Coast Creole English (GCCE) to refer to that early stage and retain Krio for its Freetown descendant.' Cassidy also notes that I support the notion of a Portuguese-derived protopidgin, most likely based upon Sabir. In fact I have questioned that language as initiator, indicating that modern descendants of the early pidgin.., .bear only superficial resemblance to (Hancock 1969, p. 11).2 I have discussed alternatives to the Sabir hypothesis elsewhere (Hancock 1975) including the reconnaissance language theory proposed by Naro (1973). As Cassidy says, the big question is just when and where pidgin English developed originally. A significant misinterpretation of my data is