Abstract
This paper investigates passive structures in Carribean French Creole (CFC) and takes issue with the analysis proposed for Dominican French Creole (DFC) by Amastae (1983). Using a broad data-base drawn primarily from DFC and St. Lucian Creole French, it argues that there is no justification for A.'s claim that DFC passives are embedded under a higher-predicate BE. Evidence is also presented that CFC passivization is a productive process, with few restrictions on subject-type or tense/aspect marking of the sort A claims. An alternative analysis is presented, in which the CFC passive is treated as a simplex structure, directly generated by the base. It is argued that CFC passivization is limited to a restricted class of ambi-transitive verbs whose essentially actional character is preserved in their passive use. The derivation is best handled by a lexical rule which relates active and passive verb pairs. The distinction between passive and anti-causative constructions is also discussed as well as its implications for the rule of final-vowel truncation in Isle de France Creole. Finally, there is some discussion of the possible sources of the Creole passive in West African languages.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call