Hostname: page-component-75d7c8f48-hfkw9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-14T23:08:22.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Putting Back the Clock in Variation Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Derek Bickerton*
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii

Abstract

The presentation of Washabaugh 1977 represents a retrograde step in the analysis of creole systems. Though he may be correct in his belief that the constraints on complementizer variation were inadequately stated in Bickerton 1971, his decision to replace that analysis by one based on lexical diffusion and the perception of surface structures is vitiated by a number of errors, both analytic and statistical, and ignores what is most interesting about linguistic change, i.e. the capacity of the human mind to make quite abstract generalizations about broad linguistic categories.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 by Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bickerton, Derek. 1971. Inherent variability and variable rules. Foundations of Language 7. 457–92.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. 1973. The nature of a creole continuum. Lg. 49. 640–69.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. 1975. Dynamics of a creole system. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek, and Odo, Carol. 1976. Change and variation in Hawaiian English, I: general phonology and pidgin syntax. University of Hawaii, mimeo.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred. 1975. On explaining some typological facts about raising. Paper presented at LSA Annual Meeting, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Peet, William Jr. 1976. Subject relativization in Hawaiian English. Dissertation, University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Washabaugh, William. 1977. Constraining variation in decreolization. Lg. 53. 329–52.Google Scholar