~GEN00~

'currently referenced only from soc00--set up on reciprocal terms w/ soc00--both as sisters, rather than parent/daugh'

Question template from soc00:

{<[LINK]> What are the origins of this approach? }

{<[LINK]> How have these approaches affected pidgin and creole studies?

--review the field <[LINK]>--include DeCamp, Labov's change, Bailey, Sankoff?, Bickerton

{<[LINK]> What, in their own estimation, do nearly all generative approaches share?}

{<[LINK]> -- What are the assumptions and methods used to study this way? What is privileged?}

{<[LINK]> What effects result from employing this approach in its strong form? (only get part of the picture)}

individuals' representations {<[LINK]> representations defined?} through the means of language are privileged as part of theoretical focus. <cd c:\max\cog><[LINK]> -ideal speaker comity is determined by adding sum of individuals--individuals' cultures form society. How does it deal with power relations? {<[LINK]>}

problems/weaknesses/critiques of approach contrast with sociolinguistic approach. {<[LINK]>}

~gen00~

{<[LINK]> }Make this a jump: ~ The sociohistorical context of pidgin and creole genesis is extremely important to these (gen.) researchers, being considered in many instances to be an abnormal, even catastrophic, process of language tranfer across time, generations and space. Pidgin and creole languages, in certain stages of their historical developments and under particular conditions, reveal patterns of language acquisition which can be compared to other, less catastrophic processes. What is missing, what is gained, and what stays the same all tell these linguists a story, much contested at this time, similar to what studies of aphasic language skills or studies of signing as a first-acquired language of deaf persons, are telling other researchers about languages not thus altered or acquired. ~