**** Superstrate and developmental models, villification of...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UP: <[LINK]>

Well into the twentieth century, linguists and others often considered pidgins and creoles as "baby-talk" or else corrupted forms of European parent languages. Superstrate and developmental models have been villified as a result, often on just grounds. Taking into account differences of perspective could help place these positions in their proper functional role. Superstrate models, foreigner talk models and baby-talk models may have been superstrate strategies for teaching and communicating in the superstrate language to members of substrate groups, which trhe superstrate member may conceive as an amorphous homogenous mass. Such a set of strategies in no way reflects the strategies employed by substrate groups and individuals with the superstrate and each other

-- Historiographical context of superstrate and

developmental models ............................ <[LINK]>

-- Genealogy and historicism in substrate and

superstrate approaches ....................... <[LINK]>

• - The interaction of perspective and genealogy...<[LINK]>
• - Historical irony as a tool for dealing with mixed

genealogies ........................................ <[LINK]>

• ........................................... \/PgDn\/ for sources
• .............................................. /\PgUp/\ for text

Molefi Keti Asante offers a succinct review of the worst offenders in "African Elements in African-American English." {essay in _Africanisms in American Culture_, Joseph E. Holloway, ed., Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990, 19-21. }